CERT.18. My employment and/or compensation for performing this appraisal or any future or anticipated appraisals was not conditioned on any agreement or understanding, written or otherwise, that I would report (or present analysis supporting) a predetermined specific value, a predetermined minimum value, a range or direction in value, a value that favors the cause of any party,
or the attainment of a specific result or occurrence of a specific subsequent event
(such as approval of a pending mortgage loan application).
The whole thing should be bolded.
As with every other law, rule or regulation, an accuser has to be able to demonstrate that the act involved all of the elements of the offense, not just some of them.
The fact that I return an appraisal that meets a borrower's expectation cannot automatically be assumed to be a violation. Neither does the fact that I got paid for it. Lucky for us, too, because if a client has reasonable expectations - and some clients do - then the appraisal will usually meet them.
The elements of this violation of the Management section include:
- accepting the assignment and/or compensation; and,
- returning the desired value or direction of value;
AND
- doing both of the above pursuant to a take-it-or-leave-it contingency.
It takes all three elements, not just the first two, to comprise this particular violation. Merely being aware of what the client wants is not enough; nor - on a practical basis - can it ever be enough. Otherwise just being aware of what the intended use of the assignment is would be enough to put us all in violation. Establishing the first two elements is usually pretty easy; but without the third element there literally is no violation.
That's why your apparent allegation that all multi-staged assignments are by definition a violation of this part of the Management section of the Ethics Rule is incorrect and unsupportable. Repeating it over and over again isn't going to make it any more correct or any more supportable. Prove the contingency
ALWAYS exists (which you can't, because it doesn't) and you'd have a shot at it.
You need to find a different angle. Attempting to present sections of text out of the context provided by the remaining qualifiying elements isn't working for you.
