Analyze this statement.

[hastalavista]

DD also see standard rule 3.3 section a.

I can't find it (everyone in my family tells me I need glasses): I see section 3.3 but no "a"? Am I just missing it? Give me a line-number and hopefully I'll find it that way!

Thanks

 

[CANative]

Todd,

What about REO appraisals? 4 values of the same property in some cases. It's still one assignment. What about FRT's of proposed construction. Two values. As is and as proposed. Two values. One assignment.

A review that includes the reviewers opinion of value is one assignment.

TJ... why are you making a big deal out of a clumsy statement you found while reviewing a report?

 

[PropertyEconomics]

I'm really trying not to be rude, but I'm not sure what you're failing to see. I acknowledged that the word "dismantle" was probably not the best term to use, and was limited to the statement I provided. No where did I say I was dismantling the entire report or trying to trash someone else's work with pleasure. That's wrong and not what I do. You took it upon yourself to assume that. So consider yourself corrected a second time and move on.

However looking past the fact that's what I said, a certified appraiser who can sign just about anything for anyone made an incorrect, misleading statement that was caught by someone that apparently someone like you looks down on. This statement is blatantly false and was made by someone who is supposed to have had many many years of training and experience, sat through hours of classes, and so on. That was my reason for the original post. Is how can someone who has had all of this training and experience make such an unfounded statement and think it's alright and that it will fly.

Words have consequences. Isnt that the whole thrust of your question to begin with?

 

[T.J.]

No problem, I'm fine with a disagreement. And I agree, I don't want to play a word game (or any other type of oneupmanship) either.

I wouldn't raise my point if it were not for the fact that "assignment" is defined in USPAP as being a "valuation service" and a review is defined as being part of the "valuation service" set and that "review assignment" (singular) is defined as forming a quality opinion of another's work that can include a review opinion of value (still referred to in the singular form "assignment").
That doesn't mean you (or anyone else) couldn't break it out into two assignments if you wanted to.
I prefer not to since it would be redundant. :new_smile-l:
And, technically (as you point out and I agree), if a review appraisal requires an opinion of the quality of another's work, then the second appraisal is a review that has that same quality opinion plus a review value (therein lies the redundancy)- because if it doesn't have the quality opinion and it just has a value, then it isn't a review appraisal.
(that's one of reasons it is easier for me to consider it "one assignment"... but that's me! ).

I've had the same "discussions" with other appraisers about this especially in CE classes. Some I've talked to didn't know that page two of the 2000 form is only required if you check "no" at the bottom of page one. So don't let the "trainee" fool you. I've been around the block.

I guess I should have waited another couple of months to make this post and we wouldn't be having the "trainee" discussion.

 

[T.J.]

Words have consequences. Isnt that the whole thrust of your question to begin with?

The thrust of my question was to get what my "peers" viewpoints, experiences, ideas, concerns, thoughts, etc were on the statement. Rather than rely soley on my own thinking and reasoning I consulted other resources to aid in my conclusions. Yes words have consequences. I fully understand that. However after acknowledging the word(s) chosen may not have been the best I was still berated by someone who doesn't appear to forgive and forget. Not that I'm asking you to. But at least dropping it would be nice. m2:

Don't get me wrong, I've got nothing but love for you. Normally though when someone says "yeah, shouldn't have said that. I'm sorry", you move on.

 

[hastalavista]

I guess I should have waited another couple of months to make this post and we wouldn't be having the "trainee" discussion.

If you do decide to ask this question as new post in a few months, do me a favor:
A. PM me so I can join in.
B. Make sure the discussion distinguishes between the review process (SR3) and the form it is to be reported on (Fannie 2000).

The difference in how the assignment is being reported can be important. I can tell you that for every 500 reviews I've done for a mortgage finance transaction, maybe 1 has been on the 2000 form.

Thanks!

 

[T.J.]

Todd,

What about REO appraisals? 4 values of the same property in some cases. It's still one assignment. What about FRT's of proposed construction. Two values. As is and as proposed. Two values. One assignment.

A review that includes the reviewers opinion of value is one assignment.

TJ... why are you making a big deal out of a clumsy statement you found while reviewing a report?

I'm starting to wonder that myself Greg. A few of the responses I've gotten have made me wonder anyway. Most of them have been great and what I was looking for so I'm not going to complain. But I've seen a lot of appraisers turned in for less and disciplined harshly for "clumsy" statements. I like to network to get ideas and such on different situations and circumstances. I'm always wanting to learn new things so getting the views of my peers is the best way to do that.

 

[CANative]

TJ...

Don't argue with Denis about appraisal review. Trust me. He's cornered the review market in the north bay area. LOL.

BTW.. Screw Fannie's goofy, poorly designed "review" form 2000. The format is ridiculous.

 

[hastalavista]

TJ...

Don't argue with Denis about appraisal review. Trust me. He's cornered the review market in the north bay area. LOL.

Not quite!
And you know, Greg, you probably just jinxed me. It won't be long before Santora chimes in and gives me a clinic on reviewing! :laugh:

 

[T.J.]

If you do decide to ask this question as new post in a few months, do me a favor:
A. PM me so I can join in.
B. Make sure the discussion distinguishes between the review process (SR3) and the form it is to be reported on (Fannie 2000).

The difference in how the assignment is being reported can be important. I can tell you that for every 500 reviews I've done for a mortgage finance transaction, maybe 1 has been on the 2000 form.

Thanks!

No problem. Once the trainee is changed after my test is taken and passed I'll be happy to pose the question again. This time I know what words to say (more importantly what words not to say). I was asking thoughts about a statement, not why I am doing what I'm doing. But hey what's a little fun and excitement to make the day a little better huh?!

I don't have hard feelings toward ANYONE. I respect everyones opinion when it's presented in a non threatening way. So it's all good.