Anonymous Complaints

[JENIFFERW]

The United States Constitutional Amendments give us the right to face our accuser. Shouldn't it apply to appraisers?

 

[NC Old Guy]

But JenniferW, the appraiser isn't being accused of anything. The report is supposed to be able to stand on its own. It is only when it does not stand on its own in a credible way that the appraiser should be brought in to the discussion. Does it not all come back to the the report? If it is a faulty report (or at least potentially so) as determined by the third party (the appraisal board investigator), why should the complaintant be considered an "accuser"? Again, I'm assuming a rationale process where frivilous complaints are tossed without even involving the appraiser. Maybe, if annonymous, the level of being frivilous should be less but gosh, have to start somewhere.

Kind of like domestic violence. The state can step in even if the spouse refuses to press charges.

Just an opposing viewpoint.

 

[George Hatch]

Kenneth,

Taking this to the next step, is it USPAP compliant for an appraiser to submit an anonymous complaint to a regulating authority (or any other entity) stating that "the value is wrong" without providing a review which meets the requirements of Standard 3. And, since the reporting appraiser's opinion differs from the value reported in the appraisal under review, shouldn't the complaint be accompanied by an appraisal meeting Standards 1 and 2 which supports their opinion of the "correct" value?

The ASB recently a Q&A in 10/2007 about this:

Is Compliance with STANDARD 3 Required when Submitting a Complaint?

Question: I am a real property appraiser. I want to submit a complaint regarding an appraisal report to my state appraiser regulatory agency. I would like to express my opinions and comments about the quality of the appraisal report in a cover letter. Am I obligated to comply with STANDARD 3 regarding my opinions and comments regarding the appraisal? If so, who is my client?



Response: No, you are not required to comply with STANDARD 3. Because the individual filing the complaint is acting as an appraiser, USPAP applies. However, because there is no client, there is no assignment and so STANDARD 3 does not apply. Therefore, the appraiser making the complaint would be obligated to comply with the portions of USPAP that apply generally to appraisal practice (i.e. DEFINITIONS, PREAMBLE, the Conduct, Management, and Confidentiality sections of the ETHICS RULE, the COMPETENCY RULE, the JURISDICTIONAL EXCEPTION RULE, and the SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS RULE).

Simply put, the ASB is saying that if there's no client then there's no assignment; if there's no assignment then SR-3 doesn't apply. SR-3 used to be worded in such a way as to apply to "appraisal review" in general. A few years back SR-3 was changed to apply to appraisal review assignments, which is arguably a subset of all appraisal practice involving an opinion of another appraiser's workproduct.​

​

Nevertheless, the balance of USPAP still applies, including the requirements of the Ethics Rule and Competency Rule. Those requirements by themselves place certain obligations on an appraiser who is rendering an opinion on another appraiser's assignment results even when there is no client, thus no assignment, thus no SR-3. Seeing as how SR-3 provides a roadmap for how to develop and communicate such an opinion in a review assignment, it seems to me that almost all of those requirements would still be appropriate when performing a similar function albeit with no client or assignment. ​

The central question here transcends what is permissible by law or regulation or even by SR-3 itself. The stated purpose of USPAP is to promote and maintain a high level of public trust in appraisal practice. That overarching theme places an obligation on appraisers to go beyond parsing the terms to see what they can get away with and to be the professional, even when there are no specific performance standards (like SR-3) in effect for that specific activity.​

​

​

​

 

[Webbed Feet]

The United States Constitutional Amendments give us the right to face our accuser. Shouldn't it apply to appraisers?

Oh Crap! .... LOL! .. Ok, with respect to everyone that keeps bringing this up. I think a few people here need to pause and think this one over.

Precedent regarding what society has to say about this was set a very long time ago and has not changed. If I come upon a dead body with an axe sticking out of what was the head, proceed to anonymously call in a "complaint" that I think somebody has been murdered, does a person later found to be guilty of a murder (if one was committed) have a right to either get off scot free completely, or get a reduced sentence, because they can't "face their accuser" in court? People, the "accuser" is the the state! Just exactly like kidnapping is a federal crime. The feds don't need no stinking outside "accuser!".... The fed is the accuser!

When you obtain your license to appraise in a state, you agreed to abide by the laws of that state and agreed to that state's right regarding the matter of enforcing those laws. Find the acception to that agreement that says all appraisers get to wiggle out from under that agreement because somebody else other than the state is "the accuser" over a matter regarding license compliance and this person just won't come forward and meet them like a man! ... LOL.... Well guess what? .. I suppose you all are saying murders and kidnappings should be allowed just as long as anonymous accusers won't come forward in that case, huh?

Yes, yes. I know, the world is so unfair to us. But just like if an anonymous tip I am a kidnapper may result in my house getting searched, and me questioned for hours even when innocent, I have to turn in my work file and go through some unpleasant stuff due to an anonymous complaint because I signed on to get a real estate appraiser's license saying I would uphold the public trust. Now I can sit around and grumble, or post, about how unfair that is. Or I can turn in my license and get out of this business. But what I can't do successfully, if it is found I really did breach all my duties under my licensing, is attempt to wiggle out from under my duties because the complaint was anonymous.

The reason for this is the public trust comes before my comfort and self-rightous sensibilities over it. And I already had the choice to follow my licensing requirements, or not to follow them, long before any complaint was filed anyway. It was my choice, I made it. What difference does it make if I hope to get out of it by hoping people can be intimidated into not filing complaints? And it is this very last point why states are wrong not to accept anonymous complaints. Using intimidation in hopes of reducing the number of complaints is wrong. Most especially when the motivation behind that is purely bugets and keeping up appearances to make it look like complaints are handled timely. When in fact the complaints are NOT being handled timely.

Or I suppose our society could redefine kidnapping to mean only when "the accuser" personally can identify the kidnapper. And "the accuser" has to be either the mother or father of any child that disappears. Otherwise it's not a kidnapping because the FBI is just too busy to deal, and it's just not fair to search Webbed's house over an anonymous complaint about it.

Webbed.

 

[Restrain]

Acting as an independent fee appraiser, under today's litigeous society, and knowing some appraisers who have made BIG bucks making deals work, I would no longer file a complaint individually where I had to disclose my name. The reason is that individual appraisers are getting sued for doing that. One particular appraiser I know who really made some horrible appraisals ended up getting a saction placed in his file instead of getting his license yanked. Think he wouldn't try to come back after me for the money he spent defending himself?

Sorry, no more.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

the appraiser isn't being accused of anything

wrong

give us the right to face our accuser

wrong

the "accuser" is the the state!

wrong

you may ask, "why so little weedhopper?" Because you are being accused, indirectly. The constitution is one of LAW. "Administrative laws" are not "Law" in the sense that they are enforced by the Executive branch, in fact, they are only "administered"....administrative rules fall under the Judicial branch, which last I checked have very little power to police. They judge. The legislature passes the law. The Executive branch enforced it....selectively.

Thus, we have "licensed" occupations, which are a [poor] substitute for 'real' law enforcement. We are 'regulated' by a quasi-legal system of administration which is outside the constitutional protects of the bill of Rights...we're screwed.

 

[Elliott]

Terrel said, Thus, we have "licensed" occupations, which are a [poor] substitute for 'real' law enforcement. We are 'regulated' by a quasi-legal system of administration which is outside the constitutional protects of the bill of Rights...we're screwed.

I'm sure all states are different and I agree that 'administrative law' is a poor
substitute for the real stuff, but I think virtually any decision can be appealed
to a higher court, especially when things like 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness' can be shown to be involved.

 

[lanaschindler]

More than a few years ago, I attended a State Law course which was taught by a recently past Chairman of the State Appraisers Board. He stated that any complaints submited to the Board which were strictly value based were round filed. Such an action seems reasonable to me. Value, being an opinion, is not actionable. However, failure to ethically and competently develop that opinion of value should be actionable.

It seems reasonable to require a complaint, anonymous or not, to identify faults in the report which lead to an opinion of value which is not credible. Otherwise, the complaintant is wasting valuable time and resources.

I agree 100%

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

virtually any decision can be appealed

if your pockets are deep enough. That's the upperhand held by the boards. They know they have the resources of the state to back them. They can hire any expert, pay any fee, and have an entire phalanx of lawyers try their side....You have E & O...who wants to settle or you have your own pocketbook. Show me a rich appraiser and I will show you an appraiser the state won't screw with.

 

[rcsone]

.....if not all, most state boards do not have the personnel to adequately handle existing, established complaints due to finances......why add some more unburnable material to the fire?.......best to all...........rs