- Joined
- Jan 15, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- California
In my view appraisers should expand their consideration of why this requirement is being added. It's not all about you. It's more about legal liability and social/political liability. About isolating the responsibility for the alleged offense to the actual offender and cutting off the ability of the claimants to extend their accusations and extend the legal liability to the deep-pockets of the State.
There are at least three liability-related aspects of requiring course of any kind. Maybe more.
In the event there's a complaint thereafter, the state can't be accused of complicity or negligence because they did their part, and the individual cannot claim they weren't trained in the material.
There are at least three liability-related aspects of requiring course of any kind. Maybe more.
- To demonstrate that the State met their responsibility to require the exposure
- To demonstrate that the individual actually did get exposed to the material and cannot reasonably claim ignorance of that material.
- To actually train the individual on the material.
In the event there's a complaint thereafter, the state can't be accused of complicity or negligence because they did their part, and the individual cannot claim they weren't trained in the material.
Last edited: