Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[George W Dodd]

Could one make the same statement about a designated appraiser standing up at a public gathering and saying things he/she knows are not true?

My comment to this statement has been retracted .

 

[Workbox]

At least some, actually many, showed up at the meeting to make statements. Again, many of you gentlemen should join and make your statements, I did. Some good, some not so good, but I was there. Not just on this forum. If you can say it hear, say it at the meeting or any other board meeting that may arise in the near future. I plan in trying to support those that want to make a difference. I have been finding some great airfares with little help from my friends.

 

[George W Dodd]

Well, let's just examine this issue. Like most USPAP dilemmas, one should start by looking at the basics - the definitions.

There was no client. No one engaged me to create those documents.

Hence, there was no assignment. As defined in USPAP, and assignment requires an appraiser, a valuation service, and a client. Two of three ain't bad, but there was no client. As disclosed in the posted documents, the client is fictional.

Since there is no assignment, there can be no assignment results.

The documents posted are reports as defined by Webster, but they are not appraisal reports as defined in USPAP. A report is something that is transmitted to a client. No client, no transmission to a client, no report. Since there is no report, there cannot be a misleading report.

Using the terminology Mr. Dodd used at "the" meeting, the "proprietary software" used by Head Surfer is limiting. The allowable size for attached PDFs is much smaller than a typical appraisal report. So, the samples posted were stripped of a lot of data to get them to a size that could be posted. Oh my!! Since this forum could easily meet the definition of a web portal, I sure hope the VA Board does not shut it down!!
:blush:

The documents were provided to allow readers who may never have seen an AIReady document the opportunity to look at one themselves rather than relying solely on claims made by others. There are not actual appraisal reports, because posting such would violate the Confidentiality Section of the Ethics Rule.



Could one make the same statement about a designated appraiser standing up at a public gathering and saying things he/she knows are not true?

Mr. Wiley,

In the good old days it would have been pistols at dawn, but since were suppose to be professionals I'll just have to refer this to my attorney.

You've taken this to another level when you call me a liar. I believe your comments to be slanderous and libleous and certainly actionable under the law. Since they are made on a public forum damages should be high. And I thought I didn't have a retirement account. I am fowarding your post to my attorney and will be taking civil action against you.

 

[Bearslide]

QUOTE: Danny Wiley]Could one make the same statement about a designated appraiser standing up at a public gathering and saying things he/she knows are not true?]

Funny you should take that view, Mr. Wiley. Nothing was brought forward at that meeting that is not true. Many of the appraisers in that room have seen first hand what happens to reports that are converted, myself included.

Folks who threaten to bring a razor to a gunfight often find themselves outgunned. Metaphorically speaking, of course.:dry:

To many of us, this issue is very clear. Conversion of reports serve no one's interest except lenders and the sellers of the conversion software. By their limited nature, they often force appraisers to compromise what is put in those reports, therefore creating the potential for a misleading report. Seems a very clear cut USPAP issue to me.

 

[George Hatch]

I dispute the notion that these formats signficantly infringe on an appraiser's ability to adequately communicate their analysis, opinions and conclusion in a manner that is meaningful and not misleading.

I also dispute the notion that appraisers rights automatically take precedence over the needs of the intended users. We provide a service, for which we are paid, even if poorly. We can't very well take their money while at the same time telling them that our desire for convenience outweighs their desire to get their reports in a format that they can use in multiple ways.

We especially can't be making the argument that it's primarily about report security and integrity given the known vulnerabilities of these pdfs.

 

[Bearslide]

George Hatch;1651297]I dispute the notion that these formats signficantly infringe on an appraiser's ability to adequately communicate their analysis, opinions and conclusion in a manner that is meaningful and not misleading.

I also dispute the notion that appraisers rights automatically take precedence over the needs of the intended users. We provide a service, for which we are paid, even if poorly. We can't very well take their money while at the same time telling them that our desire for convenience outweighs their desire to get their reports in a format that they can use in multiple ways.

We especially can't be making the argument that it's primarily about report security and integrity given the known vulnerabilities of these pdfs

Mr. Hatch;

I respect you tremendously and have always found your posts to be thoughtful. However, I must disagree with you on this issue.

When these various software conversion programs will not allow you to include what you deem necessary documentation, photos, or pages, then the analysis, opinions and conclusions can become misleading.

This is not about appraisers rights. This is about an appraisers obligation to produce a complete report, not some abridged version of said report. This is about the integrity and completeness of reports. You are advocating for the clients, which is not our job. The only need a client has is for an accurate, complete and thorough opinion of value and physical characateristics. What the lenders want is not necessarily good for the public trust and that is clearly evidenced by the current mortgage mess. (I owe ya a copyright fee, P)

This is not about convenience for appraisers. This is about maintaining the completeness and format of the appraisal as written by the appraiser. When we start allowing a conversion program to decide what is and is not important, it is no longer our appraisal.

It IS about integrity and security, as delivered to the client. What they choose to do after the fact is not our concern. I have no problem with lenders doing whatever they choose once the report has been delivered. They are free to use it in any legal way they see fit. If they so badly desire these reports be converted, then they are free to convert them. However, they don't want the responsibility, as stated by Mr. Owen. No, they would much prefer the responsibility (can you spell LIABILITY) lies with the appraiser. And therein is one of my issues. I am to be held liable for a report, but I cannot deliver it in the format and order I intended? I think not. I am to be held liable for a report of which I cannot produce a true copy? I think not.

 

[PL1957]

Mr. Wiley,

In the good old days it would have been pistols at dawn, but since were suppose to be professionals I'll just have to refer this to my attorney.

You've taken this to another level when you call me a liar. I believe your comments to be slanderous and libleous and certainly actionable under the law. Since they are made on a public forum damages should be high. And I thought I didn't have a retirement account. I am fowarding your post to my attorney and will be taking civil action against you.

Wasn't there a SLAP suit filed against someone who participates on this Board? I don't remember the details - maybe someone could fill them in ...

 

[Bill_FL]

To me, this is really pretty simple. Its not that big of a deal. The delivery of the appraisal report shoudl contain two files. One is a pdf document that we create. The other is a data packet, in a common format that can be used by the client's to populate their computer systems. It can not be that hard, can it? The most difficult part would be getting the industry (lenders and software providers) to agree on the common language/format in which to transmit the data packet.

 

[Don Clark]

Good questions Mr. Clark. We discussed these with the AQB while I was on the ASB. The AQB guidenote explains that there must be client to have an assignement, and a client must receive something in order for that something to be a report. The AQB addressed this by saying that an educational entity could engage the appraiser as a learning exercise - hence there is a client.

An intended user is someone the appraiser intends to use the report. Since there is no client, no assignment and no report, there is no intended user.

Danny,

According to AO-21, page A-68 under Appraisal Practice, if you are teaching a course acting as an appraiser, it states that you must comply with USPAP. there certainly is no client, no report, but a requirement that the appraiser MUST comply with USPAP as relates to the DEFINITIONS, PREAMBLE, Conduct, Management and Confidentiality section of the ETHICS RULE, the COMPETENCY RULE, and the JURISDICTIONAL EXCFPTION RULE.

So, a client, a report, are not necessary for an appraiser to have to comply with USPAP.

 

[Ken B]

Don,

not that I think it should be necessary to point out the obvious to a USPAP instructor, but AO's are not part of USPAP and are not binding upon appraisers. I also don't see the correlation between teaching an appraisal course and demonstrating the capabilities of a software platform.