• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

ACE

I know an appraiser who committed suicide after all his business was taken from him 15 year ago. He was approaching 70 and figured he couldn't start over. I was always surprised he didn't do something crazy like that first.
 
some are just trolls. and some are paid shills :unsure: :ROFLMAO:
Then there are the liars on your side of the argument

What you are blaming me for is observe/report. For declining to lie in furtherance of your talking points.

It's not my fault that any of these requirements exist in their current form. I had nothing to do with any of that.
 
The definition for personal inspection is simply a definition. USPAP obviously acknowledges that some assignments require such - when a user requires it then USPAP requires the appraiser to meet that expectation, same as all the other expectations.

Here's the extent to which SR1 addresses the identification of the property characteristics.
View attachment 94382

sorry...inspections are just part of the sow...TAF has no business making up new definitions to help their paying unethical stakeholders...and or sell another book :ROFLMAO:
 
go troll DW...just one time:ROFLMAO:
Show me the lie or the untruth and I will. If you would stop trying to traffic untruths you wouldn't feel like every correction for the record was some form of personal attack.
 
sorry...inspections are just part of the sow...TAF has no business making up new definitions to help their paying unethical stakeholders...and or sell another book :ROFLMAO:
The only universal requirement for personal inspection in appraisal assignments in USPAP is for the did/didn't inspect certification in SR-3. The SOW disclosures would also touch upon the issue but personal inspection isn't always part of those SOW decisions.

The purpose of that definition is to limit the opportunity for appraisers to falsely claim they personally inspected when their IRL actions were limited to looking at pics or a video or the work of a runner or whatever. They can use other people's work if the assignment allows for it but they can't lie about what the appraiser personally did/didn't do.
 
There are good and bad arguments to make about PDCs. Arguing the use of data collectors somehow violates USPAP is a bad argument.
 
There are good and bad arguments to make about PDCs. Arguing the use of data collectors somehow violates USPAP is a bad argument.

you can sign off on paschals inspections...:ROFLMAO:
 
There are good and bad arguments to make about PDCs. Arguing the use of data collectors somehow violates USPAP is a bad argument.
The first thing appraisers should be concerned about is providing accurate disclosures for what their own assignment required of them, what their SOW was, and what they actually did/didn't personally do in their assignment. USPAP requires that, the GSE programs require that and the GSE form enables that.

The other issues involving the risks to the lenders and such are valid arguments but at the same time are also mostly immaterial to the appraiser's decision making when it comes to SOW issues. You wouldn't use info from a PDR that you thought was inaccurate just the same as you wouldn't knowingly use bad data from any other source.
 
Comment: Scope of work includes, but is not limited to:

• the extent to which the property is identified;
• the extent to which tangible property is inspected;

well duh :ROFLMAO:
 
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top