Endless USPAP

[djd09]

it is not even ansi they are following...it is a quasi ansi fannie scheme...with exception codes

 

[George Hatch]

Do you think borrowers or bankers understand the term "GLA" or even gross living area, or like what most MLS's I've ever seen put out as "heated SF"? I argue they understand "heated SF" far more than "GLA". I would argue outside of our fellow appraisers and the secondary market "GLA" is misleading unless you have an explicit definition within the report.

The reports aren't written for borrowers because they aren't intended users as that term had been defined since the term was added to the DEFINITIONS section 25 years ago.

As for the lenders not understanding standard abbreviations they see in every single appraisal report, you might be right - maybe we do need to include a Glossary on page 45 in every URAR.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The reports aren't written for borrowers because they aren't intended users as that term had been defined since the term was added to the DEFINITIONS section 25 years ago.

Do you think the borrower still cannot sue over a report "intended" for others? Do you think the borrower does not have the right to see the report? Do you think that we've all been taught to write the report so that all the users - intended or not - can understand it?

And yes some of us do put in a page of definitions.

 

[djd09]

impartial means treating all parties equally...even the borrowers

 

[George Hatch]

The borrowers are not party to the appraisal engagement.

 

[George Hatch]

Do you think the borrower still cannot sue over a report "intended" for others? Do you think the borrower does not have the right to see the report? Do you think that we've all been taught to write the report so that all the users - intended or not - can understand it?

And yes some of us do put in a page of definitions.
View attachment 94023

I daresay there's a distinction to be made between what people can sue for (anything) and who is/isn't a party to an agreement between the appraiser and their client.

You don't write appraisal reports in Russian for Russian borrowers who don't speak English, do you? Of course not; they aren't your client or other secondary user and they aren't using your appraisal report for its stated usage.

Now if your client TOLD you at the outset that the borrower would be using the appraisal for their own usage then that would make them an intended user. Your next question would be to inquire exactly what their usage is and then you would be obliged to figure out what it would take to reach "meaningful and not misleading" to that additional user and that additional usage. And try to figure out how to get there in the event there was come conflict between meaningful to the borrower vs meaningful to a lender.

That's why the malicious interpretation of C#23 basically can't work.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

You don't write appraisal reports in Russian for Russian borrowers who don't speak English, do you?

I know banks and courts that do hire interpreters for Hmong's older generation when they get loans or go to court. And they do make sure that the borrower has a family member that speaks English when they give them the appraisal report.

there's a distinction to be made between what people can sue for (anything) and who is/isn't a party to an agreement between the appraiser and their client.

Privity may work and sometimes it does not. I've seen that in Federal bankruptcy and local courts. My report for a bank was used as evidence in one hearing despite my objections and I was even subpoenaed and examined by the plaintiff who subpoenaed me. The opposition objected to the point that the judge recessed to have the two lawyers meet her in her office and after they wrangled for 45 minutes, while I sat drumming my fingers... The judge dismissed me, and the defendants lawyer refused to cross-examine me at that time. Judge told me to leave and that they might call me at a later date. Apparently, the parties settled out of court as I was never asked to return.

 

[George Hatch]

The whole point of defining intended use/intended user is to require the appraiser to fit the SR1/SR2 to the legitimate expectations of those users. And to define the boundaries of what the appraiser intends to do. These concepts aren't built into our standards to act as a legal defense for misconduct or malpractice.

My client engaged me to perform an exterior-only and report on a non-GSE form. That was what I was trying to do; not to provide a warranty to the borrower for the quality and condition or the reported sizes or anything else outside the SOW for that particular assignment.