Measuring partial stone (or brick) veneer/ partial stucco (or siding) homes

[alebrewer]

It seems appraisals are held to a lower standard in context of what is credible results for a 2055, ( see the certs and disclaimers ) An appraiser can not be held to a standard they can not meet, and if appraiser not allowed access/not expected to measure on a 2055 or desktop, then a client /intended user recognizes sf being "off" is more of a possibility, despite appraiser's efforts to verify/discover.

The standard is lower but the expectation on client side is also lower for a 2055/desktop, - why they have not been typically used in origination work - the path is being paved for that to change it appears

Nope - the same standards apply regardless of the SOW employed...

 

[J Grant]

Nope - the same standards apply regardless of the SOW employed...

?? Credibility is measured in terms of assignment -intended use, so either the intended users recognize limitations of a changed SOW of assignment or they do not.

If client expects the same level /standard of verification and accuracy with an appraiser not inspecting /not measuring due to limitations of SOW, disclosed on report, then that is a client problem not an appraiser problem.

 

[alebrewer]

How is that possilbe ?
With 2055 and desktop, the appraiser does not inspect interior and typically does not measure, so how can the same standard for inspection or size sf apply? The SOW is different and thus the standard of exception is different from client /intended users, since it is disclosed on the report sources and limitations of what was personally done or not done by appraiser.

If client expects the same level of verification and accuracy with an appraiser not inspecting /not measuring due to limitations of SOW that is a client problem not an appraiser problem.

Show me where, in USPAP, it allows for a lower level of credibility due to the appraiser not inspecting/measuring the subject. Please.

 

[J Grant]

Show me where, in USPAP, it allows for a lower level of credibility due to the appraiser not inspecting/measuring the subject. Please.

It does not say that in USPAP .

USPAP says not to be misleading, an appraiser does not pretend to mislead on a 2055 or desktop about reliability or accuracy when lack of inspection not measuring is part of assignment conditions. The disclosures, disclaimers and certs on the report addresses that.

Credibility is measured in context of assignment. If a lender or client wants to accept the less accurate/lower verification due to lack of personal /int inspection by an appraiser that is their choice.
The misleading part is users and clients trying to foist it on the public trust that results are the same no matter a lower SOW.

 

[alebrewer]

It does not say that in USPAP .

USPAP says not to be misleading, an appraiser does not pretend to mislead on a 2055 or desktop about reliability or accuracy when lack of inspection not measuring is part of assignment conditions. The disclosures, disclaimers and certs on the report addresses that.

Credibility is measured in context of assignment. If a lender or client wants to accept the less accurate/lower verification due to lack of personal /int inspection by an appraiser that is their choice.
The misleading part is users and clients trying to foist it on the public trust that results are the same no matter a lower SOW.

So we're agreed then - the same level of development and reporting is required for either SOW, yes? If so, do you just turn down 2055 assignments because you believe your opinions and conclusions have less credibility?

 

[J Grant]

So we're agreed then - the same level of development and reporting is required for either SOW, yes? If so, do you just turn down 2055 assignments because you believe your opinions and conclusions have less credibility?

It is not the same level for both, each level of development and reporting is commensurate with the different assignment conditions .

I rarely do 2055 and dislike them, when I accept one then it is what it is -a 2055 with its more limited SOW and expectations from client end. My opinion credibility is measured in the terms of the assignment. SOW and intended use

Imo, an I would say an appraiser's opinions needs to meet a lesser standard of credibility in a 2055, which is disclosed in the certs and disclaimers. The client accepts that level as okay for their intended use . USPAP says not to be misleading, it does not say same level of results for all assignments - it says do not be misleading about the SOW and results. If a client expects same level from a desktop as with a personal inspection that is a client issue, not an appraiser issue. The appraiser did not mislead about what they did or did not do..

The problem is the trend of trying to sell as same the result as a appraiser personal inspection for a 1044 P. You don't get nothing for nothing, the 1004 P has certain disclosures so if a client or public trust expects the 1004 level, the client/public is either ignorant of what the certs and disclosures mean, or are misled by the Koolaid used to sell trust for these products....

 

[alebrewer]

It is not the same level for both, each level of development and reporting is commensurate with assignment conditions .

Is that so? Ok - please point me to the section in the SOWR, Competency Rule, Ethics Rule (heck, even the Jurisdictional Exception Rule), or standards rules where it says the level of inspection dictates the level of credibility required. Again - please.

 

[J Grant]

The new USPAP definition of credible, worthy of belief, is not really different from common usage. The context for use of the term in USPAP is explained in the Comment to the definition: credible assignment results require support, by relevant evidence and logic, to the degree necessary for the intended use.

 

[alebrewer]

"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.

Comment: If relevant information is not available because of assignment conditions that limit research opportunities (such as conditions that place limitations on inspection or information gathering), an appraiser must withdraw from the assignment unless the appraiser can:

* modify the assignment conditions to expand the scope of work to include gathering the information; or
* use an extraordinary assumption about such information, if credible assignment results can still be developed."

Taken from the SOWR. Underline is mine (with the exception of 'Comment'.

Sidenote - the agencies do not allow the use of an EA under the Covid appraisal guidelines.

2nd Sidenote - the intended use for a 2055 is the same as for a 1004, at least in mortgage lending transactions.

 

[Overimprovement]

How often is the 'measured' GLA significantly different than the 'tax' GLA?

Quite often in my market. And nearly all the local realtors go by assessor GLA. Or they estimate to the nearest 500 feet, always erring on the high side of course.

Measuring a house is one of the most important things I do in my market. I do understand other non-1970's assessor offices and MLS's may be more accurate.