3 vs 4

[DWiley]

You have to include some items in the review report that are required because it's also an appraisal.

Yes. And those things are listed in 4-2(j)

 

[sputnam]

Yes. And those things are listed in 4-2(j)

Incorrect. The written review report must comply with 4-1, 4-2(a-i and k). If the review includes the reviewer's opinion of value, it also must comply with 4-2(j). The comments state that, if it's a review of an Appraisal Report for a real property appraisal it must also comply with the requirements ot SR 2-2(a).

 

[DWiley]

Incorrect. The written review report must comply with 4-1, 4-2(a-i and k). If the review includes the reviewer's opinion of value, it also must comply with 4-2(j). The comments state that, if it's a review of an Appraisal Report for a real property appraisal it must also comply with the requirements ot SR 2-2(a).

If one includes a value opinion with an appraisal review report, then STD 4 dictates the portions of STD 2 that one must also address. One does not actually have to comply with all of STD 2 (as some asserted), only those portions listed in STD 4. Hence, as originally and correctly stated, one must comply with STD 1, 3 and 4

 

[sputnam]

Disagree. Reread USPAP without thinking that you already know. A review that includes the reviewer's opinion of value, including just agreeing wiht the appraiser's opinion, IS an appraisal... and must comply with Standards 1 & 2. Some of SR 1 & 2 requirements can be met by reference... but, they must be met.

 

[Carnivore]

Sputman vs Dwiley

This match is going to get Interesting. I respect both of them. So my wager will be placed on Dwiley. It could just be a matter of semantics.

 

[Surf Cat]

 

[Surf Cat]

 

[Functional Obs]

AO-20 is very helpful. Read the entire AO. It has two parts. One part is just the review and the 2nd part addresses when you provide your own Opinion of Value.

Your using the current USPAP. The report your reviewing may have been developed/reported by the original appraiser using the prior USPAP.

I had to hit the REFRESH button before I could press "Like." An ad for furniture was blocking the words. There are three ads at any given time wreaking havoc on any page in this forum. Anyway, great answer.

 

[sputnam]

Sputman vs Dwiley

This match is going to get Interesting. I respect both of them. So my wager will be placed on Dwiley. It could just be a matter of semantics.

Nah. I'm out. USPAP is a lot like law... experts don't agree on fine points. Not sure where the long-ish post form Surf Cat came from.. since no citation was provided. Y'all do it any way you want to... i choose to be more conservative... that is, I will interpret to in a way that may require me to do a little extra work.. but, I'll never get tagged by an over zealous regulator.

 

[Surf Cat]

Nah. I'm out. USPAP is a lot like law... experts don't agree on fine points. Not sure where the long-ish post form Surf Cat came from.. since no citation was provided. Y'all do it any way you want to... i choose to be more conservative... that is, I will interpret to in a way that may require me to do a little extra work.. but, I'll never get tagged by an over zealous regulator.

To be honest and upfront, I've never done an official review. That being said, I was curious about to SR 1 & 2 or to not SR 1 & 2 in regards to what's required in appraisal review responsibilities. Off to my search on the web.

The excerpts I pasted were from the article; Appraisal Review: What it is, What it's Not and Why it Matters by Jack Young.

Apparently, it didn't provide any clarity Lol. Also, parts were cut off trying to work with this website. Interesting read though.