AQB Update On Proposed Changes To Appraiser Qualifications

[TRESinc]

You are kidding yourself if you think that many if not most of the major lenders and the major secondary market players (i.e., the GSE's) are not also behind the proposed AQB changes...there is no chance that this proposal was made without their support.

but the LOGIC does not fall in line with what j THINKS is happening...

 

[George Hatch]

I never said you did not go to college, I said your stance is anti college.

My stance is that some of the arguments you and others are making WRT college vs appraising have been demonstrated IRL as being untrue. Other arguments are not supported in either direction by any analysis because - apparently - no such analysis has been performed. And finally, some of the arguments you have been making haven't even been about individual competency but about the merits of competition control - with which I can agree as a general concept but disagree that licensing programs are a moral mechanism for that.

 

[George Hatch]

WRT AMC involvement in this debate I think that's pretty obvious; and equally obvious that it is in their economic interests to obtain a nominally "acceptable" skillset for the lowest possible price.

I can also acknowledge that fact as a reason many incumbent appraisers will oppose any reduction in qualifications criteria as it relates to the most difficult and most expensive barrier to entry for aspiring appraisers to negotiate.

But if that's the primary rationale the AQB wants to respond to then I want them to be honest about it and acknowledge it openly. If you've got the hair to act in your own self-interests then say it loud and say it proud, don't hide behind a combination of untruths and half-truths and ancillary reasons as cover for your real priorities.

OTOH, if the AQBs priorities are about solving a problem then I still think they'd do well to follow the appraisal process in their deliberations. That process STARTS with problem identification; it doesn't skip it in favor of proceeding based on unsupported assumptions.

 

[The Warrior Monk]

Regarding the tribe managing its own:

That is one thing that has most definitely been eviscerated on the residential lending side post-licensing. The number of those coming into the business on the residential side currently is being limited, but not due to the tribe managing its own, but rather due to the consequences of not managing their own. They created an oversupply of appraisers, competing with each other, resulting a bottoming out of fee. AMCs have been taking advantage of this, but the end result is that the fees can't be split any further, thus eliminating an financial benefit to hiring someone.

 

[J Grant]

3 out of 48 is pathetic, and taking away the degree requirement will mean a continued over supply, or ample supply of appraisers will continue in the other states.

 

[J Grant]

WRT AMC involvement in this debate I think that's pretty obvious; and equally obvious that it is in their economic interests to obtain a nominally "acceptable" skillset for the lowest possible price.

I can also acknowledge that fact as a reason many incumbent appraisers will oppose any reduction in qualifications criteria as it relates to the most difficult and most expensive barrier to entry for aspiring appraisers to negotiate.

But if that's the primary rationale the AQB wants to respond to then I want them to be honest about it and acknowledge it openly. If you've got the hair to act in your own self-interests then say it loud and say it proud, don't hide behind a combination of untruths and half-truths and ancillary reasons as cover for your real priorities.

I am honest about it. I am also honest about that acting in our own self interest about fees is not mutually exclusive to also having an interest in maintaining the public trust. You are the one setting it up that it has to be one or the other.

I explained why the res lending side being a rewarding career also serves to safeguard the public trust by keeping it a field that can attract and keep quality people.

 

[The Warrior Monk]

You're entirely missing George's point. What you're stating has nothing to do with licensing.

I personally prefer the situation we're in now with the college-degree requirement versus a dozen years ago. And I also think it is a good thing in the long-term, as it elevates appraising to a profession, as has occurred in various other fields that are often mentioned.. But that doesn't mean licensing is supposed to regarding supply and demand regarding appraisers.

 

[George Hatch]

There doesn't seem to be a lot of interest in addressing my observation of the disparate effect on aspiring appraisers who are economically disadvantaged. How many quality people are we excluding there, and are our own economic interests really worth that cost?

 

[Deleted member 130081]

WRT AMC involvement in this debate I think that's pretty obvious; and equally obvious that it is in their economic interests to obtain a nominally "acceptable" skillset for the lowest possible price.

I can also acknowledge that fact as a reason many incumbent appraisers will oppose any reduction in qualifications criteria as it relates to the most difficult and most expensive barrier to entry for aspiring appraisers to negotiate.

But if that's the primary rationale the AQB wants to respond to then I want them to be honest about it and acknowledge it openly. If you've got the hair to act in your own self-interests then say it loud and say it proud, don't hide behind a combination of untruths and half-truths and ancillary reasons as cover for your real priorities.

I still think the AQB would do well to follow the appraisal process in their deliberations, particularly when as that process stipulates that problem identification comes first, before we start deciding which modes of analysis are necessary to get to a supported conclusion.

You and I share the same view point here. If the AQB is about qualifications, then they should stick to the context of qualifications. They should ask and answer some questions a) is a 4-year necessary to generate a better appraiser? b) will a better appraiser generate a better appraisal? c) will the rewards of the requirement out-weigh the adverse? - all of these in the context of qualifications, not the market share of individual appraisers. If the rewards are marginal at best (which is my opinion/guess), then what grounds does the AQB have to make the 4-year a requirement? Intentions aside, the 4-year will effectively restrict otherwise capable people of entering the profession and I have a moral issue with that in the land of opportunity. If the AQB can not prove the 4-year produces a positive result that outweighs the negative, then what grounds do they have to advocate it? When people behave in a way that does not make sense, there is often more to the story.

 

[George Hatch]

You're entirely missing George's point. What you're stating has nothing to do with licensing.

I personally prefer the situation we're in now with the college-degree requirement versus a dozen years ago. And I also think it is a good thing in the long-term, as it elevates appraising to a profession, as has occurred in various other fields that are often mentioned.. But that doesn't mean licensing is supposed to regarding supply and demand regarding appraisers.

The increase in qualifications criteria obviously works to my advantage as well. I've never hired a trainee and I'm not about to start. It should be apparent that my arguments have nothing to do with my own self-interests.

One area where my experience differs from most here is that I spent 18 years teaching CE courses to fully licensed/certified appraisers, most of those people functioning completely OUTSIDE of the AI CE track. I have literally had thousands of appraisers come through my courses over the years, in large part because I operated in the largest appraiser population in the nation. Heck, I accumulated over 2000 hours just in USPAP instruction alone, not counting the other course topics that I developed and taught. It is my personal and direct exposure to my peers in that environment as well as on this forum that has contributed to my opinions.