Ethics vs Education

[Terry Russell]

I am afraid I will have to agree with Ben, this time. One cannot teach ethics to another. Ethics must be demonstrated and set forth as an example early in life. Even if an individual strays from those early experiences or lessons, they can still return and practice ethical behavior,
It is not just right from wrong or good or bad.

IT is doing what is true in spite of the consequences.

What I would like to know is why more lenders are not reported to the

proper authorities? I realize that in many instances it would be your

word against theirs and the discouragement of not achieving satisfactory

results from one’s reporting of lender pressure would tend to prohibit such

actions.
But speaking of ethics, failure to report a banking officer, a Realtor or

mortgage broker for breaking the law, is in fact a violation of the ethics

rule.

I have whole lot of trouble with this issue due to the fact that I read so

much about it on this forum, but I rarely read that anyone has taken

steps to correct this situation, that is, reporting the practice (of lender

pressure) to the proper authorities.

Some feedback about the difficulties of “turning someone in” would be

a lesson for many.

I realize it is not anyones favorite tasks, to put themselves on the firing

line in regards to making really tough decisions.. Terry

 

[Paul Ness MAI]

Wow, 100% for ethics. In the words of Glen Beck "Huhh, I didn't see that one coming!"

 

[Terry Russell]

Paul,

I am all for education in every aspect of one's life, however, in regards to this topic, it would seem that the poll results (thus far) display the fact that (within the context of this topic):
Without ethical behaivor, a requirement for higher learning is worth ZIP.

Terry

 

[Paul Ness MAI]

Absolutely! We don't disagree. My point for my previous post was that the results shouldn't surprise anyone here. Nobody in their right mind is going to place education over ethics.

I think the poll was precipitated from objections of many here... that educational requirements shouldn't be increased because there is more of an ethical problem in the profession than there is an educational problem. To that I agree, but we can't really change someone's innate unethical behavior. We just need to put them out of business.

The point being that it isn't an either/or situation of education vs ethics. A good appraiser MUST be all three - educated, ethical and competent, and you can't really make up for being weak in one area by being stronger in another area. I don't think the reason for increasing the education requirement is to cure the ethical problem. That must be dealt with in disciplinary areas. But there is also a competency problem. Read my recent post in the "commercial forum"....How about adding a poll that includes competence?

 

[David C. Johnson]

<span style='color:darkblue'>Pam,

I had to abstain from voting due to the construction of the question. I agree with Paul that what we have in appraising is not an Either / Or question as is implied by the wording of the poll question.

I once asked a platonic girlfriend in 6th grade (after she balked at doing something): "Are you a man or a mouse!" She pretended to think a little while then started crying (play crying -- she was acknowledging the dilemma which was nice of her because she could tell that I thought it was pretty good -- by the way, she made a 1600 on the SAT back when that really meant something).

In some states, very obvious ethical violations are being treated as educational or IQ problems. College eductions would work toward fixing this (board) problem as such boards could no longer try to say the offender must have just not understood the first time around, and maybe they are just slow learners. By virtue of college educations, this trick cannot occure because the offender has demonstrated the capacity to learn and therefore ALREADY KNOWS what they are to know. Forget remedial classes.

The boards will be further forced to do their job.

That is just one of many reasons for the general education requirement. Another is the demonstration of an investment in life. The college educated person has more to loose. Some other time of that one though.

However, keep this in mind: Just because one is uneducated does not automatically make one ethical.

We like to slam some other professions (all of which DO require the proposed base-level education, or more). But having ex-fork truck operators with third-grade educations testifying before Congress as to why he / she ripped-off all the stockholders presents a compound problem to be solved -- rather than just an ethics issue (in fact, it may not be ethics at all, right?)

BOY AND I DO MEAN THIS -- Congress would have loved it!!! Their job would have been so simple -- "Decreed: More Education for anyone who will be in these positions in the future!" (just to weed out this guy testifying right now if for no other reason) !!

I am pushed for time, but I would recommend that those who have not, to consider reading the following post of mine. It applies to the rank and file as much as it does to prospective board members. Others have said the same thing:

http://www.appraisersforum.com/forums/view...p?p=23380#23380

Here is the real question:
Why would anyone be against such a base-level education for new appraisers? Any existing appraiser without such an education who is against the change represents de facto prima fascia evidence that it needs to happen. (Because they may be demonstrating that they are not educated enough to understand what an excellent deal it is for them.)


dcj

PS: I can drive the hell out of a fork truck due to my experience doing it for years -- but this experience would not necessarily make me a better witness in front of Congress...

PSS. Is it true that not all MAIs have college educations? And some still exist who were handed their designation for affirming they have been appraising (right or wrong) for some period of time? Someone please correct me if I am mistaken on this.

PSSS: OK, going to read Paul's post in the Commercial Forum, then back to work...</span>

 

[David C. Johnson]

Don,

I read your VA post. I am sorry to hear that is going on. It's sad.

Paul,

I read your post too. That's maybe even worse.

Oh, well...

dcj

 

[Paul Ness MAI]

Very good post David. Cain't anser yur qeschun bout MAI's tho, heck I had to study to nites jest too git the spellin of my designashun rite.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Ethics is two fold. One is not caving to pressure. The other is to know your limits. It is unethical to take an assignment that you are not willing to either invest the time to do it right or lack sufficient knowledge to know what you are doing.

I saw a perfectly good residential appraiser bungle a rural commercial building so badly, I could scream. I also have an oil field lease appraisal that the CG done for the county and bungled it roy al lee. He stated a leasehold estate then added more than 50% of the value as pump and tank equipment (can you say trade fixture.) His entire scope of work statement was "I looked for similar lease properties but could not find any."

ter

 

[David C. Johnson]

Paul,

Your spelling is aPauling !

Easily more worser than mine -- plus, I often use much bigger words sometimes.

In your very first sentence alone in your post right above, if I am not mistaken, you have as many as four or five misspellings -- and to be honest, I'm more than a little suspicious about one or two in your second.

Ha !!

You make my point -- and I don't even have any professional appraiser desecration!! :lol:

Daivd C. Johnson