TerryRohrer
Elite Member
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2005
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- Montana
Deleted duplicate.
Thank you for the unnecessary history lesson. And for validation of my comment. And the appraisers in my office did appreciate the change from film to digital. You must have had someone else typing and compiling your reports if you resisted the change. Change has always been a part of any industry, including the appraisal industry. However, not all change is positive. If the change to 3rd party results in less credible reports and also does not save time, is that positive?I appreciate your confirmation that inspection is not required by USPAP.
Yes, by necessity, a personal inspection has been commonly conducted. For decades photos were commonly taken with a camera that used film and reports were delivered on paper. As technology changes the things that were formerly common and/or necessary also change. And I can tell you from first hand experience, because I was an appraiser when both of those changes happened, many appraisers resisted those changes as well. Heck, I remember the uproar when my firm bought forms software - the appraisers could not fathom typing their own reports.
Or the thousand subtle hints that the DIY updates are not equivalent to professional quality.Take photo at certain angle that doesn't show a crack in the flooring or wall or anything that might be a negative influence
Montana required that trainees had to be accompanied by their mentor for at least the first 50 inspectionI see a lot of requirements RE whether a trainee can inspect on their own, but I don't see any requirements that the trainee MUST perform some minimum amount of inspections... am I missing something?
No, of course not. But, in testing no assumptions are made about the effect on credibility. That is measured with actual data. And, when that data is analyzed it is not done in a vacuum - it is done in comparison to appraisals done with a traditional inspection.If the change to 3rd party results in less credible reports and also does not save time, is that positive?
No, of course not. But, in testing no assumptions are made about the effect on credibility. That is measured with actual data. And, when that data is analyzed it is not done in a vacuum - it is done in comparison to appraisals done with a traditional inspection.
Those traditional inspections are not 100% error free. I know that from both data and personal experience.
GSEs should never be the ones who decides. It should be our decision, and the FreddieMac certifications should state the liability of the report is solely the appraisers. Then appraisers could utilize others without GSEs or lenders trying to mess with our businesses.Relying on third party data for the appraisal is not eliminating the appraisal or the appraiser. It is specifically retaining the appraiser and the appraisal as part of the process.
What is with the license shaming. That is the second time you have asked that question. I answered it the first time (in another thread). I can guarantee it wasn't because of the "man" holding me down.What held you back from getting your CR?
BTW - Nobody is more overwhelmed and slower than surveyors these days, and I don't see anybody trying to force them to hire third party measurers for surveys. It's just ridiculous.
RISKI think all opinions and comments from every forumite has validity....
But at the end of the day it's all about RISK....
And it appears that the rules makers are heading slowly towards the conclusion that the RISK is minimal enough to alter the industry....