Is It USPAP Violation or Reviewer's Opinion

[Terrel L. Shields]

In reading a recent sanction of an appraiser - I question the observations of the review and why these items would be mandatory to mention. A pond? A circle driveway? Have you ever seen a circle drive or off-site pond impact value? I mean lake view is one thing...but a pond? Especially in the middle of Oklahoma? I mean they are invariably red, muddy affairs with rare exception. And rarely over 1 acre in size. Some small watershed reservoir might be different impact, but a simple "pond" no. And why is a "circle driveway" so significant that it impacts value? I cannot recall seeing one that did.



Finally, I have seen assertions by investigators that you must identify functional and external obsolescence in a property or comp. But USPAP only says you are only required to address accrued depreciation. So, when are you REQUIRED by USPAP to address functional or external obsolescence?

 

[George Hatch]

What were the user's known/knowable expectations for that assignment? If it's not in writing then the tie goes to the runner. Burden of proof rests with the state, not the accused. Especially when the purpose of the review is to make a decision about the licensee and not the subject property.

 

[djd09]

should the appraiser analyze rectangular driveways...

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

What were the user's known/knowable expectations for that assignment?

Complainant were banks. Interestingly, among recent sanctions, one appraiser was one of the first 50 certified residential appraisers in the state and another was a very low number certified general number who had 40 years as an appraiser and had actually served on the board previously. Kinda scary.

 

[djd09]

why did the bank file a complaint...lowballed

 

[George Hatch]

Complainant were banks. Interestingly, among recent sanctions, one appraiser was one of the first 50 certified residential appraisers in the state and another was a very low number certified general number who had 40 years as an appraiser and had actually served on the board previously. Kinda scary.

If it was a bank then they might have a written appraisal policy, and that policy might address such issues. That's about all any reviewer would have to work with, and in no case should any reviewer be moving the goalpost on an appraiser after the fact and on the basis of some uncommunicated expectation or requirement.

The subject of that review is that appraisal report and whether it met the requirements for that assignment. The subject of that review is NOT how the reviewer would have appraised that property based on their own preferences. Its bad when its a regular reviewer doing it but is unconscionable when it the govt doing it as a means of punishing an appraiser for not reading the reviewers' mind in advance.

Besides, how much of an effect on value and upon the usability of the appraisal for its intended use do we think a circular driveway adjustment is anyway? Surely there must have been other more substantial allegations being made that figured into that outcome.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

they might have a written appraisal policy

The investigator did not mention that.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Surely there must have been other more substantial allegations being made that figured into that outcome.

Well yes, but why pile on?

https://www.oid.ok.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Board-Order-24-006-Matter-of-Aubrey-J.-Dobbs.pdf

 

[George Hatch]

The other beef I have with appraisers is that some of them don't make the distinction between what the report says vs what they are alleging the appraiser did/didn't analyze or consider.

"The (SR2) appraisal report omits mention of the recent sale in the subject's sales history". That's an observation that can be characterized as a fact, when present.

"The appraiser didn't (SR1) analyze the recent sale" is an accusation that the reviewer can't actually support because they can't know what the appraiser did or didn't think about in their assignment; they can only know what the content is of the report.

Bad when it's just a garden variety review assignment for a lender but far worse when it's a state appraisal board resolving a complaint about the appraiser's conduct.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Another example where I have often said that a walk out basement is NOT a 2 story...it came back to bite this appraiser