Update from Shane Lanham

[djd09]

well...how can i ignore front door elevations since it is so meaningful

 

[shrubberyvaluation]

I have never been able to under the critical review process. Prior to the 'review' the reviewer should go do an appraisal and see what they came up with. Then they can compare their report with the report being reviewed and submit their criticism. And the original appraiser should then get the reviewers report and criticism, and submit their comments. That would be the proper process. The whole concept of 'coming in low' is a flawed process. I was grounded in the scientific process from high school chemistry and physics (I set up lab experiments for 2-1/2 years in HS).

Its like being an umpire, everyone wants you to call it a ball when it goes right down the center and if you don't you are wrong.

 

[djd09]

they got the appraiser right where they want...too high number hitter...too low racist...eh, george?

 

[shrubberyvaluation]

Requires the appraiser to not ignore what the intended user believes to be "meaningful and not misleading"

Problem is borrower in most mortgage transactions is not an intended user but they can sue you or file a complaint. So we are not supposed to write it for the intended user but liable to others.

 

[Non Sequitur]

It isn't over. A claim has been filed against him for costs, see attached.

 

[chad hampton]

Those 2 assholes are truly two despicable DC swamp creatures. The days of settling your disputes in the streets can't come back soon enough.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

How does any bias benefit anyone....
Yet it exists....

In reality, or simply a butthurt reaction to something that did not go their way.

Everyone believes in the fallacy that "something" causes any event or action. Same problem. Random error is never allowed for. Serendipity does not exist. Accidents are deliberate acts of someone.

1. False Cause: Assuming a causal connection between two things that are merely correlated or associated. (I think my house is worth more, therefore, the appraiser was biased against me.)
2. Fallacy of the Single Cause: Believing that an event has only one cause when it is the result of multiple factors. (It has to be the appraisers bias and not the limitations of the data, market conditions today, or methods required by the lender.)

 

[shrubberyvaluation]

It isn't over. A claim has been filed against him for costs, see attached.

View attachment 103109

Reed Colfax, didn't some appraisal organization give them money? Was it TAF or appraisal institute? I remember when the leader of the appraisal institute claimed an appraiser was racist based on an appraisal report he never even saw, this was Craig Steinly. Anyone sending money to AI is sending money against appraisers, at least residential ones.

 

[Elliott]

It isn't over. A claim has been filed against him for costs, see attached.

View attachment 103109

I'm not a lawyer. I'd think when this hits the judges desk he'll dismiss it or Lanham will 'counter sue' and then it will be dismissed. Cost of doing business when you pursue a case of alleged racial bias and fail.

 

[George Hatch]

Problem is borrower in most mortgage transactions is not an intended user but they can sue you or file a complaint. So we are not supposed to write it for the intended user but liable to others.

The way I would put it is that you should write for the user and also write for yourself. Not providing your opposition with the unearned free shot is actually writing AGAINST them, nor FOR them. If you won't do it for your user because you hate them so much then you should at least consider doing for yourself.

It's just like crossing the street. You might have the "walk" sign right of way but it still pays to look both ways before you cross.