A very interesting line of comments on a pertinent topic of the day. We have read many-a-time here in the Forum about the better, quicker, more-effective process of "turning the other guy in" and bringing something to the attention of a higher authority so that they can "put an end to...."...what ?, a person, a manner of appraising, different opinion, local competition ? The poll introduced dealt with the anonymous complaint. And, then there are the other out-in-the-open complaints. Were there as many actions taken, or words spoken, about the entire complaint process back in 1998 through late summer of 2001 ? Are complaints being cranked up because many may have more time on their hands than compared to last June or July ?
I attended our last State Board's meeting less than two weeks ago. There was a segment of discussion on the complaint process, and they shared their general numbers on the matter and made remarks about policy toward them. There are clearly several types of complaints that can come in. The anonymous variety has two forms, the "Plain Brown Wrapper" and the "Shy Complainant". The B.P.W. type arrives usually as a B&W copy of a report, with no return address on the envelope, and maybe the scantest of a sticky note stuck to the cover page....saying the likes of..."read this, and do something about it !" The Board feels that the predominance of these are from disgruntled 3rd parties, and not the legitimate user or party directly engaging the appraiser, and are thus not warranted for the Boards commitment of time and resources. There can be a line-in-the-sand sometimes. The contents are re-mailed to the respondent/appraiser with a note of FYI, we received this, and no investigation is being opened.
The S.C. type wants their identity NOT to be disclosed in any phase of a possible investigation thereupon. These pose their own set of added problems as the Board feels the respondent has a right to face an accuser. Usually the SC variety have more of a written memo explaining how this complaint is sourced, and an enhanced reason for why it serves the Board and citizens of the state for a closer look to be carried out. Usually, the respondent is contacted and the normal process follows. When a complainant blatantly starts throwing out the accusatory "F----" word, they find that far more is resolved at-hand when the approach becomes one of simply identifying issues of Negligence and (lack of) Competency. Fraud does not come into play as often as some complainants might feel.
They find it very critical to differentiate between legitimate users ill-served by an appraiser and their report, where harm has been done, or a party has experienced a true loss, or violations of appraiser standards or state or federal law are involved.......compared to the situation where non-users, who had no direct reliance upon a report product, who never engaged the appraiser in the first place...approach the Board with a different motive. They clearly know they do not have the manpower, time or financial resources to play a role of Reviewers-Are-Us .....at the drop of a hat.....for whoever makes the phone ring or mails something with very little or no explanation.
