Where Do You Think "geographic Competency" Begins And Ends?

[J Grant]

GH- And it's always been the users - not appraisers - who have decided what's meaningful to their usage.

Really? Then why is USPAP only applicable to APPRAISERS? The fact is appraisers have a standard (USPAP) they need to adhere to for meaningful/ credible results apart from what the users think is meaningful. And keep in mind, what users think is meaningful is anything that makes a deal work or puts money in their pocket, and many of them have a history of fraud or consumer abuses/unsound lending practices.

 

[Meandering]

Just for the record, I had nothing to do with this thread being posted and have not discussed anything about thus thread with either George or Danny. I don't know why you think that I am "upset" with any of the answers, as nothing that is posted on the AF has any effect on my life....I just pointed out the foolishness of some what is posted here, which is neither upsetting to me nor surprising. I don't really care if someone has a different viewpoint from me and am more than willing to respect a different viewpoint if it is rationally and honestly advanced, but when people argue in an intellectually dishonest manner by setting up a strawman, using a red herring, misrepresenting what others have actually stated, otherwise obfuscating, or as George stated, using the Swedish argument, then I am going to point that out.

Blah, blah, blah says the chief appraiser who reviews appraisals,
and has no idea what's in a listing contract, even though the USPAP requirement is for analysis of all listings within 3 years for the subject property.

https://appraisersforum.com/forums/threads/pocket-listings.219268/page-6

Maybe it's the competency of those that do not work in the field doing appraisals that should be scrutinized, analyzed, and questioned.

So how come the CA at a mortgage insurer has any interest in the answers to a poll which seeks conformation that competency is easily available on the internet? I should think that a mortgage insurer would be more concerned about "safe and sound".

But let's see how we can screw over some more appraisers? eh?

IAEG

An institution's selection process should ensure that a qualified, competent and independent person is selected to perform a valuation assignment. An institution should maintain documentation to demonstrate that the appraiser or person performing an evaluation is competent, independent, and has the relevant experience and knowledge for the market, location, and type of real property being valued. Further, the person who selects or oversees the selection of appraisers or persons providing evaluation services should be independent from the loan production area. An institution's use of a borrower-ordered or borrower-provided appraisal violates the Agencies' appraisal regulations. However, a borrower can inform an institution that a current appraisal exists, and the institution may request it directly from the other financial services institution.

So Okay,

Go ahead and let the AMC staff appraisers appraise the COW states. Just tell 'em Marion says they are competent and they don't need any experience in the location, cause there's other words in the middle with commas.

Go for it.

Because I want to see how much the FDIC learned from the last bust, when they go after those facilitating the next one.

Feel free, blame ME. I say they are competent, now go ahead and send appraisal orders all over the states to every appraiser on the panel, and we'll watch the market forces at work.



Idiots with ties, are still idiots.


.

 

[timd354]

I thought the poll question was pretty straightforward and simple.
A question that goes to the individual appraiser's measure of how s/he evaluates her/his competency in regard to working in a market that up to that point, had no direct experience in.

I used to ask questions on this forum regarding issues. I don't think I've ever run a poll because I don't know how it works. When I asked questions, they were many times related to an article I was writing or a class I was thinking of developing. I thought this forum a great resource to bounce questions off of a group of national appraisers (I have plenty of local appraisers to work with, but here is a national group with a much more diverse perspective than I have).
I'm not going to use it as that kind of resource anymore. Not when a simple question of a simple topic creates pages of attacks. More has been written on the motivations of the poster than support for one's position in the poll (IMO).

Of course it was a simple question, but none of that matters. Whenever any question or comment may lead to an answer or a discussion that a certain small group people do not like, the attacks will be quickly forthcoming. That's just the way it is, and sadly I don't think that will ever change

 

[J Grant]

Well, we all better hope that it is not impossible to answer, because the impending expansion of the use of hybrid or bifurcated processes will almost certainly force some state boards to deal with this question. Given all the animosity that is being posted about expansion of use of such services, it is almost a given that there will be those who will turn in any appraiser providing such a service, just becasue they are opposed to the service.

If that happens, and if a state board reacts as some have in this thread (and, frankly, there is no reason not to expect that) the results could be far reaching and catastrophic. The shot fired in an attempt to curtail hybrid/bifurcated appraisals could easily richochet and hit those doing “traditional” work right between the eyes. That is why careful and thoughtful consideration of the topic is necessary.

We cant' control what state boards decide, can we? I fail to see how a state board or other action attempts to curtail hybrid bifurcated would hit those doing "traditional" work right between the eyes-such a statement almost sounds like a threat. If bifurcated or hybrid is the direction the field takes and fannie, state boards allow it or lenders accept it, so be it. The results down the road will speak for itself, and will not be known until enough years pass for these products to work their way through the system.

Some change is for the better and some for the worse.The fact is that for decades, traditional appraisals have anchored a system allowing favorable interest rates and terms for borrowers and a low default rate. Many of the problems with appraisals are not due to the product, or appraisers, but the ordering/client end which has been plagued with problems . Those problems will not be resolved just because the product changes from traditional to bifurcated. if anything the problems can be compounded by cutting assignments up into pieces and sending less trained and responsible people out to do a critical piece of the assignment (inspection)

Only time will tell how tinkering with appraisals fares.

 

[Meandering]

Of course it was a simple question, but none of that matters. Whenever any question or comment may lead to an answer or a discussion that a certain small group people do not like, the attacks will be quickly forthcoming. That's just the way it is, and sadly I don't think that will ever change

Oh come one,

Where's that "free market" supply and demand rules all?

Why should AMCs be limiting the service area of fee appraisers, by not sending orders from the entire state to each appraiser?

Come on now,

Those appraisal licenses are good for the whole state.

Lets' REALLY see the effects of free market Supply and Demand.

Stop limiting appraisers practice areas.

I expect to see appraisers driving 200-300 miles per $200 assignment, and spending at least 2 hours on the phone and on the internet gaining that "competency" in the market and location. We'll just pretend that "experience" in the location, doesn't really exist or mean anything at all.



.
.

 

[DWiley]

Sounds as if there is a little bit of emotions going on here....



My response was specifically made to your specific response to JG....
"Wow. You really think George is that devious? "

Seemed innocuous at the time....
But in hindsight it appears you posted an unintentional "gaslight" comment....
Gaslight, a term I recently heard.....
So I had to find a way to use it!!!!

I'm sure if you take a step back and think about it....
Under the circumstances, it's understandable why that specific comment you made to JG now seems questionable....

My call to George and my participation in this thread were/are both driven by the same thing - my interest in the question that I posed about Geo Comp vs SR 1-2 and 1-3. And my interest in that question is driven by my consideration of the possible unintended consequences of how that question gets answered in the future.

I fail to see where I have offered any emotional response or attempted to mislead anyone with regard to motivations, but I long ago learned that some will read what they wish in between the lines of anything posted here.

As I said to JG, I don’t know the answer. I have no position on the matter; I am exploring the matter to attempt to formulate a position. But if you want to believe that I am getting emotional in defense of some yet to be determined view on the matter, well, have fun with that.

Why do I want to formulate a position? Because I believe that it is a virtual certainty that the ASB will be forced into addressing the matter, and when they do I want to have already thought it through.

 

[timd354]

Blah, blah, blah says the chief appraiser who reviews appraisals,
and has no idea what's in a listing contract, even though the USPAP requirement is for analysis of all listings within 3 years for the subject property

.

Really, I called out pocket listings as often being the result of unethical behavior by real estate brokers (IMO) and because of that you claim that I don't know what is in a listing contract and am incompetent to do appraisal reviews? Additionally, our disagreement about pocket listings in another thread has nothing to do with the topic of this thread. That is such a typically intellectually dishonest response from you which is really not at all surprising.

I got news for you...the NAR has become concerned enough about the expansion of pocket listings and he potential increase of unethical broker behavior regarding pocket listings, that the NAR felt compelled to publish a Law & Policy memo regarding the issue:

Suggesting a pocket listing
The REALTOR® Code of Ethics’ Article 1 requires REALTORS® “to promote and protect the interests of the client.” REALTORS® must always keep this in mind when recommending a pocket listing to a client. Even beyond the Code of Ethics, state law generally dictates that real estate agents owe a fiduciary duty to their clients, meaning real estate professionals must place their clients’ interests above their own and act in the best interests of their clients at all times.

Legal risk concerning pocket listings arises when agents or brokers keep listings off the MLS for reasons that are not in the best interest of the client. For example, unlike MLS listings, pocket listings are more likely to result in the agent representing the seller and the buyer, and the outcome would be a higher commission for the agent. This in itself is not illegal or unethical, but if the prospect of a double commission is the reason an agent suggests a pocket listing to the client, then this could violate the Code of Ethics, MLS rules, and laws in most states. In another example, assume brokerages in a high-end market have numerous pocket listings, which creates an aura of exclusivity for their business and attracts high-end clients. This also is not illegal or unethical by itself. Yet if the listings are kept off the MLS in order to boost the brokerage’s reputation, not to benefit the seller-clients, the result can be a violation.

I guess the NAR knows nothing about listing contracts either.

 

[DWiley]

We cant' control what state boards decide, can we? I fail to see how a state board or other action attempts to curtail hybrid bifurcated would hit those doing "traditional" work right between the eyes-such a statement almost sounds like a threat.
.

Threat? LOL !! How am I in any position to “threaten” anyone on this issue? Funny

Whatever a state board decides about the question I posed, it will apply to all appraisals, not just hybrids. So, a state board might render a decision about some “out of state rogue hybrid appraiser” and not think about how such a decision might apply equally to a traditional appraiser who simply finds himself/herself working in a new subdivision. That simple question is actually a minefield, IMO.

 

[George Hatch]

Really? Then why is USPAP only applicable to APPRAISERS? The fact is appraisers have a standard (USPAP) they need to adhere to for meaningful/ credible results apart from what the users think is meaningful. And keep in mind, what users think is meaningful is anything that makes a deal work or puts money in their pocket, and many of them have a history of fraud or consumer abuses/unsound lending practices.

You need to revisit the material to better familiarize yourself with how appraisal standards work. One of the reasons for a common standard is to protect the legitimate interests of the appraiser as well as those of the users. How do you defend yourself from accusations that you acted unprofessionally? Particularly when levied by another appraiser or reviewer? By citing your compliance with out standards, right? They are minimums with which appraisers must comply, but having done so they also provide a defensible position.

The appraiser who provides the 2055 based on the exterior-only inspection protocol is not responsible for the client's decision to use that appraisal, even though the inspection wasn't as comprehensive as the interior inspection or the engineering materials testing of the foundation, walls and roof that may be employed in other appraisal assignments. The appraiser is held to account for meeting the requirements of the assignment, saying what they do and doing what they say.

 

[Meandering]

Timmy said;


Suggesting a pocket listing
The REALTOR® Code of Ethics’ Article 1 requires REALTORS® “to promote and protect the interests of the client.” REALTORS® must always keep this in mind when recommending a pocket listing to a client. Even beyond the Code of Ethics, state law generally dictates that real estate agents owe a fiduciary duty to their clients, meaning real estate professionals must place their clients’ interests above their own and act in the best interests of their clients at all times.

Legal risk concerning pocket listings arises when agents or brokers keep listings off the MLS for reasons that are not in the best interest of the client. For example, unlike MLS listings, pocket listings are more likely to result in the agent representing the seller and the buyer, and the outcome would be a higher commission for the agent. This in itself is not illegal or unethical, but if the prospect of a double commission is the reason an agent suggests a pocket listing to the client, then this could violate the Code of Ethics, MLS rules, and laws in most states. In another example, assume brokerages in a high-end market have numerous pocket listings, which creates an aura of exclusivity for their business and attracts high-end clients. This also is not illegal or unethical by itself. Yet if the listings are kept off the MLS in order to boost the brokerage’s reputation, not to benefit the seller-clients, the result can be a violation.


I guess Timmy can't read too good.

if THE BEST INTERESTS of the Salesperson, is to advertise the house all over the place and sell it as fast as possible, well, tell me where the seller's privacy is protected, or where the seller's interests are represented???

That's why the SELLER GETS TO CHOSE how they want the property marketed.
Agents are only reminded in the code of ethics, not to recommend a particular marketing stragegy simply because it's in the Realtor's best interest.

And it's not even worded as strongly as;

An appraiser must not allow assignment conditions to limit the scope of work to such a degree that the
assignment results are not credible in the context of the intended use.


.