changing the sequence of adjustments

[Terrel L. Shields]

The institute does put out quality text and classes, but sometimes they do take it too far.

When your work is based upon a protocol or procedure rather than any rigorous math, then the bias of historical "that's just the way we do it" takes over. That really goes down to the report level. I submitted a commercial when I upgraded to CG. The reviewer argued that I should have modified my certification and should review it. Otherwise the report was fine. Since they wouldn't tell me who reviewed it, I sent it to an out of state appraiser for review. He said he couldn't locate what they were talking about....unless it was that I had the certs in a different order than the 'model' appraisal that he had from MAI classes.
Again, I was reviewed on a commercial report and the reviewer noted that I did not place the photo section in the FRONT of the report, but rather in the addendum in the REAR of the report....like that made a difference?
So when AI protocol trumps content, the appraiser can pretty much expect a problem from such Mickey Mouse problems as the sequencing of adjustments. % basis for adjustments are probably the only way you could ever run into a problem. That does not mean that the way we "crunch" those adjustments will not determine the outcome, nor does it mean that appraisers who adjust differently will come out with similar results. This ain't rocket science and we ain't rocket scientists. Shooting a moving target isn't going to depend upon your rifle having minute of angle accuracy...

 

[krnole2002]

I agree. Sometimes I think that they label things with inappropriate terms, and take trival info and make a molehill a mountain. And if it's a big deal...leave it wide open. I do think that the programs are a good quality overall, but as Steven and I were discussing...some terms they use are really poor choices for the actual valuation. You actually hit another hot topic with the institute. My last income class did not even apply mathmatical theory... just stressed keystrokes. Which I found to be counter-productive for producing competent future appraisers. I'm good at math, and have many high level math classes under my belt. So, I could find my way logically to the answer, but alot of people couldn't. Our income class part a with 45 people dwindled to 7 in part B. I guess they are weeding out people for the CG licence

 

[Fred]

thanks....maybe i'm not crazy. The institute does put out quality text and classes, but sometimes they do take it too far.

Good compared to whom? As part of NAR for decades, they had money, so they went into publishing and claimed to be "the" experts. In the early 90's, they bought out the main source of rival ideas, the SREA, and ran the SREA's chief branded product, the SRA designation, into the ground. The could publish a book now that says one plus one is three, and get appraisers to insist it's true.