AQB's latest dumbing down by 'Stakeholders' Dropping the College Degree Requirement

[Tiffany Gibbons]

I have no idea whether they do/don't, or whether they are considering doing so later on. I'm just saying that the company is engaged in providing a valuation service and as such is technically qualified to participate on the IAC under the criteria that TAF previously established many years ago.

The operative question here isn't even about what Zillow is/isn't. It's whether or not there is any legitimate reason for TAF to solicit input from any parties other than appraisers, which that seems to be the question that is driving all these allegations of systemic corruption.

Should TAF operate in isolation of any and all other external input and opinions, including from govt, the accounting or legal or brokerage professions, or from any/all other sectors of commerce? It's a question which has a parallel in every appraisal assignment: does the SOW require the appraiser to take under consideration the legitimate expectations of the user? Because the only way to identify those expectations is for the appraiser to ask or solicit or otherwise accept that information prior to forming their own SOW decision.

The practice you seem to want to advocate is for the appraisers to totally ignore their user's appraisal policies and expectations and to instead arbitrarily dictate to the user what kinds of questions they can ask or what form of SR1/SR2 they can use. And for the ASB to do the same. Just like Seinfeld's "soup nacho" character - he's only selling one soup and that's all you can buy; take it or get out.



That's quite the intellectual leap you've got going there. What makes you think they hate appraisers? What makes you think they have no curiosity or interest in what appraisers do? Because they sell AVMs instead of appraisals?

Besides, if TAF is actively soliciting input from anyone/everyone then how does it amount to an infiltration when Zillow or a lender or any other party takes them up on the invite? As an appraiser, you get your say, too. What's the problem?

They never take the comments from ordinary appraisers under consideration. Please don't bring up the preamble again. That was from a politically connected appraiser.

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

Can you point to anything TAF has done that favors the interests of anyone from any at the TAFAC or IAC or any other parties who provide input to TAF? Any changes that comes at the expense of appraisers? Anything? Because in lieu of some indication that it has happened or is happening then perhaps you should consider the possibility that it isn't happening as you are alleging.

Perhaps you've heard this one: "That which is alleged without proof can be dismissed on the same basis"

As a professional appraiser and within the context of your day job, the conclusions you are committing to are supposed to occur AFTER you have analyzed the available information, not in lieu of it. The argument to motive and the ad hominems that you have been levying against all of the participants in the system - guilt by proximity - is a form of fallacy; it's not a legitimate argument. Show us something they did. I mean something other than not amending USPAP to require appraisers use statistical analysis to support all adjustments across all property types regardless of the quality/quantity of the available data. (Which is a truly stupid idea insofar as a uniform standard is supposed to be applicable to all appraisal practice, not just GSE appraisals which are subject to the GSE overlays).

(I don't even make line item adjustments for certain property types, so what now?)

They have not done a single thing to disparage the myth of appraiser racism. In fact, they have encouraged the idea.

 

[George Hatch]

They never take the comments from ordinary appraisers under consideration. Please don't bring up the preamble again. That was from a politically connected appraiser.

See, I knew in advance that one of you would go for that bait. I will point out the parallels of the ASBs demonstrated ability to "hear, but not cooperate" with the appraisers to their equally demonstrated ability to "not cooperate" with the other feedback and input they get any of from other sources, if/when warranted. Just because appraisers (and the ASB) are capable of listening to what a borrower (or an AMC) wants doesn't mean that input will have any influence on the outcome. If a borrower tells you something that makes sense you'll agree with it, but when it doesn't make any sense you'll just nod your head and proceed to do what you were going to do anyway.

 

[Zoe]

Please explain how the composition of TAF changed over the years.

You don't have to explain to me how much political pull Joan Trice and AMC world and commingling of fees had.

Who pays TAF? Where does that money come from?

 

[Dublin ohio]

They never take the comments from ordinary appraisers under consideration.

If those comments are anything like the complaints we see on this forum. Why would they. What AMCs, clients, gases, et al do or don't do are completely outside of TAF's purview

 

[George Hatch]

They have not done a single thing to disparage the myth of appraiser racism. In fact, they have encouraged the idea.

How would they go about doing that? The evidence for/against is incomplete and inconclusive at best.

I daresay it is an unreasonable expectation for appraisers to think the proper response to these allegations by TAF should begin with "We FEEL like these allegations are unfair". They won't do that because they can't do that, and even if they did nobody would take such a denial seriously; not without a ton of data and analyses to prove that position.

 

[Dublin ohio]

They have not done a single thing to disparage the myth of appraiser racism.

Besides continually citing ad nauseum the part of USPAP that says "without bias". What more can they say" appraisers are not racists". Which is not a defense that is tenable

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

See, I knew in advance that one of you would go for that bait. I will point out the parallels of the ASBs demonstrated ability to "hear, but not cooperate" with the appraisers to their equally demonstrated ability to "not cooperate" with the other feedback and input they get any of from other sources, if/when warranted. Just because appraisers (and the ASB) are capable of listening to what a borrower (or an AMC) wants doesn't mean that input will have any influence on the outcome. If a borrower tells you something that makes sense you'll agree with it, but when it doesn't make any sense you'll just nod your head and proceed to do what you were going to do anyway.

That was my point.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Please explain how the composition of TAF changed over the years.

You don't have to explain to me how much political pull Joan Trice and AMC world and commingling of fees had.

Who pays TAF? Where does that money come from?

What part of "TAF has no say in what AMCs do" don't you understand

 

[Zoe]

I guess manna just fell out of heaven with no political contributions anywhere. That is who funds it. Heaven funds it.