First Domino Has Fallen

[residentialguy]

This is from page 60 of the handbook (09/2015 version):

View attachment 30668

It seems the original report followed this overall directive.
I don't think it is necessary to add the "EAs" that the report did. Had the report simply added this excerpt above (and cited it) the rest of the language (which I presume is intended to limit appraiser liability) is superfluous.

If I were an investigator, the one issue I would have is the report stating it is using an EA regarding competency. I would have told the appraiser that such an EA isn't necessary if one were to simply quote the handbook (I don't need an EA to do the inspection of readily observable characteristics... it is part of the regular SOW which already limits what the inspection-expectations are).

And that is probably my biggest problem when I read reports with a bunch of liability disclaimers in them:
A. Usually, they are superfluous
B. Sometimes, they have technical contradictions (like using an EA and checking "as is"); but many times those technical contradictions are not material
C. For GSE forms, most of the liability disclaimers are not going to lower the appraiser's liability; they either completed the assignment correctly or they didn't; and no amount of liability-language is going to change that

I was just going to say that....well, maybe not so eloquently. Good job, Denis. Your studies with me have paid off!

A "Home Inspection" should be provided to the appraiser prior to the "Observation/Inspection" process to meet compliance with Individual State Law, regarding the Definition of "Inspection" & "License Law" requirements per State. The Majority of Appraiser's, Licensed or Certified are NOT Licensed Home Inspectors.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

page after page after page which state the Appraiser "must" perform specific tasks and analysis which are beyond determining value and commonly associated with a home inspection.

This isn't the first time FHA tried to impose home inspection standards upon appraisers. The solution is to require FHA get a home inspection on every home and provide that to the appraiser pre-appraisal. No exceptions.

 

[residentialguy]

So Alan, let me get this straight...you're trying to fry another appraiser and possibly many others because you don't like FHA's home inspection standards?

 

[Howard Klahr]

The solution is to require FHA get a home inspection on every home and provide that to the appraiser pre-appraisal. No exceptions.

NO, the actual solution is if you don't want to perform the required scope of work then don't perform FHA assignments.

 

[timd354]

So Alan, let me get this straight...you're trying to fry another appraiser and possibly many others because you don't like FHA's home inspection standards?

Yep. Go ahead and read the documents that he attached in the OP in this thread and it is evident that is exactly what he tried to do. Pretty damn despicable if you ask me.

 

[residentialguy]

NO, the actual solution is if you don't want to perform the required scope of work then don't perform FHA assignments.

I don't know that it's a matter of "want" Howard. Do appraisers have the competency to perform them, as written?

 

[residentialguy]

Yep. Go ahead and read the documents that he attached in the OP in this thread and it is evident that is exactly what he tried to do. Pretty damn despicable if you ask me.

Agreed. I read them. POS has a new poster boy.

 

[Howard Klahr]

Do appraisers have the competency to perform them, as written?

Appraisers can be competent if they so choose to be. Clearly there are those that do perform these assignments that are as well as those that aren't.

 

[Tejus]

An appraiser cannot simply dismiss the FHA inspection requirements that are outlined in the FHA valuation protocol and no rational and intelligent person who reads the TALCB's dismissal of your obviously unfounded complaint would reach such a conclusion.

This is exactly what the TALCB ruled. Have you read the doc attachments ?

TALCB Commissioner quotes from the 05 doc attachment (I even highlighted this in the attached doc):

Based on the plain language of the scope of work rule, it is the appraiser, not the client, who determines and performs the scope of work needed to produce credible results for each appraisal assignment.

and

Under the USPAP scope of work and competency rules, an appraiser may define the scope of work in a manner that ensures the appraiser has the required competency to perform the assignment, which is precisely what the appraiser did here.

As identified in my 00 doc cover letter, some of the occurrences are difficult to believe and explain so I included the attachments so the reader could see for themselves. I also provided a link so you can obtain the originals from TALCB. If you doubt what I say, then I suggest you read the attachments or get them directly from TALCB.

I agree the TALCB ruling is a direct violation of USPAP and appraisal regulations. Since the regulatory agency ruled in this manner, they must rule consistently on similar issues and that is what the appraisal user community must follow.

Regarding your no impact on the industry comments, the Handbook author has already acknowledged the Handbook is unrealistic and has made a half *** attempt to correct it. The Handbook is still a mess, but it is a moot point because TALCB has ruled the Appraiser can dismiss the excessive SOW requirements.

You underestimate the impact of the TALCB ruling in this complaint . . .

buene suerte . . .

 

[residentialguy]

Appraisers can be competent if they so choose to be. Clearly there are those that do perform these assignments that are as well as those that aren't.

Well....yes and no. It all depends on the interpretation. Unfortunately, FHA's vague orders put appraisers in a precarious position of liability. Can you "run the DW" and know that it is working correctly?