Get right or get out!

[samblackburn]

I have never responded to any comments on this or any other forum. However, due to the gross misunderstanding of some of the comments directed toward me I'm going to respond one time and you'll never hear from me again. I simply don't have the time or inclination to read or much less respond to uninformed dribble from bitchers and gripers that have yet to accomplish one thing that enhances or brings a greater degree of professionalism to the appraisal profession.

1. Uniform Standards: USPAP should be written in simple and concise English whereby an appraiser can read the Uniform Standards and reach a definitive conclusion and likewise a regulatory board should be able to read the Uniform Standards and reach the same conclusion. Until this goal is achieved the Uniform Standards will continue to be interpreted, taught and enforced differently in each jurisdiction.

As to those comments that I don't understand the Uniform Standards or view the Uniform Standards from only that of a regulator, I say hogwash. In 31 years as a lender, I made 7,000 loans utilizing the services of an appraiser. As Executive Director of the Kentucky Appraisers Board, I have reviewed hundreds of appraisals for complaints and certification. I not only know the Standards, but I also know how they relate to the appraisal process. From some of the comments I read on this forum, its apparent some appraisers have absolutely no understanding of how USPAP relates to the appraisal process.

2. Standard 3 Review: Explaining to Tom Hildebrandt that a State Regulatory Board does not need a Standard 3 review to reach a conclusion as to whether a USPAP violation has been committed is a waste of my time and energy. And, as on old man, I'm short on both. Mr. Hildebrandt is of the opinion that if you don't agree with him that a Standard 3 Review is required on all complaints, then anything else you do or accomplish is tainted. Mr. Hildebrandt suffers from I call "stinking thinking". This being, I'm right and the world is wrong. This type of thinking is precisely whey the appraisal profession is in this mess. I might also add, "stinking thinking" can also be found on the Standards and Qualifications Boards. Not performing a Standard 3 Review on all complaints, as Mr. Hildebrandt would prefer, is the least of our problems. Putting the best-educated and most qualified appraisers on the street to serve our clients should be our number 1 concern. Griping about Standard 3 Reviews shows how little some folks understand what is happening to our profession.

If Mr. Hildebrandt and his band of habitual gripers have been instrumental at the State or National level in furthering the professionalism of real property appraising, let them so list these accomplishments on this forum. Should you have no accomplishments to list of at the present time, please refrain from disparaging those, who at the least are making an effort to advance the professionalism of all real property appraisers.

This is my first and last time on this forum, but if you have a genuine interest in being a positive influence for the appraisal profession, I can be reached at (859) 543-8943 or e-mail Sam.Blackburn@mail.state.ky.us (bitchers and gripers need not respond).

 

[rcwessel]

Amen, Sam.
Put them all in a basement and you'll have a "whine cellar."

 

[Dale Smalley]

Sounds like your the one bitchin and griping Sam.

However when the regulators throw the USPAP book at us we need to make an attempt the understand where they are coming from. There are few regulators willing to stick their neck out on this forum and give their interpertation of the rules. But I have found Tom to be a willing participant in answering USPAP questions to persons on the forum as well as from some of the other more experienced appraisers. We welcome the views from regulators that can explain USPAP and how it relates to the process.

Sam if you want to join in your welcome but leave your ego in KY because you are fair game here. Any formite still here has been ripped a few times. :twisted:

 

[Larry Lyke]

Sam --

Your behavior is as shameless as the popes.

You make pronoucements, declare them absolute, then disappear into the folds of your over-sized robe!

Isn't it better to earn respect than just demand it?

 

[George Hatch]

Mr. Blackburn,

First off, let me say that I read your article in the March 2002 edition of "The Communicator" magazine and I concur with almost everything you said in it. The state boards should be better funded, and on a federal basis, if need be. The state boards should have significant input into USPAP and into appraisal qualifications and education standards. If all of those recommendations were enacted en masse I'm sure our industry would benefit greatly. That is not to say that I agree with every single one of them, but I recognize that having unified standards at every level, from the federal agencies, down through the ASC, the State Boards and finally, down to the individual appraiser level, will be of great benefit to our industry and will promote better appraisal practice at street level.

Secondly, I don't know of any participants in the appraisal industry, the lending industry or in government who would dispute that the current version of USPAP is imperfect, or that the goals of FIRREA have been realized. Everyone recognizes that some changes need to be made; the question is, which changes and in which direction?

I'm not certain if I would qualify as one of "Tom Hildebrandt's band of habitual gripers", but I suspect that I would. That's OK, because as appraisers, we are accustomed to telling people things they don't want to hear. It's part of our job description.

I am very concerned about appraisal license enforcement issues in the United States. And just in case anyone ever asks, I don't have gripes with my own state board (California's OREA), nor have I ever been investigated or disciplined by them. My concerns revolve around the concept of due process, and I think this is where my viewpoints may diverge from yours.

I believe that there are investigative functions performed by the state boards that do not involve specific appraisals, reviews or consulting work performed by appraisers. Examples of this include, but are not limited to, functions like verifying experience and education requirements of appraisers, regulating appraisal education providers, fielding complaints regarding personal conduct, collecting fees and fines, and that kind of thing. To be sure, these activities can be performed quite adequately by non-appraisers.

There are also activities performed at the state level that only an appraiser would be technically qualified, by virtue of adequate education and experience in the field, to perform. These activities relate specifically to appraisal, review and consulting work. And no, I don't believe that users of appraisals, even power users, are as competent at rendering technical opinions on these issues as appraisers are. Competency being defined as including education and actual experience doing the do. In terms of actual appraisal work, we should not be investigated by non-appraisers, as they are not our peers, regardless of their other experiences. This also applies to those few state investigators who have 'earned' their experience hours solely while investgating appraisers for the state, if there even are any. This is not to say that non-appraisers should not participate in the actual adjudication process, only that they are not our peers, and cannot fulfill the competency requirements that we must fill ourselves.

As licensed and certified appraisers, we are held accountable for knowing and conforming to USPAP when we are engaged in these specific and well-defined activities. Since our activites in these areas are governed by USPAP, does it not also stand to reason that appraiser/investigators engaged in the same wel-defined activities should also be held accountable to the same, if not more stringent, standards? I fail to see the logic in holding appraisers accountable to one set of codified minimum standards, but allowing state boards and their appraiser/investigators to operate at a lower standard when performing the same activities. For example, if I have a comment regarding another appraiser's work product, I am held accountable for complying with both the performance and reporting requirements of SR-3. If a state appraiser/investigator has comments about a specific appraisal, review or consulting work performed by me, I think it only fair that they be held to the exact same standard as a minimum. I do not feel that non-appraisers can demonstrate the competence to render such opinions, justifying departure from USPAP by virtue of not being governed by it, nor do I think appraisal boards should be allowed to operate with lower standards of due diligence or documentation. In my opinion, the ends do not justify the means.

As for USPAP being difficult to understand or enforce, I do not see it that way. If a board is looking for USPAP to represent a comprehensive laundry list of prohibited actions they will be sorely disappointed. The federal Tax Code does that for taxes and look how complicated, contradictory and counterproductive that document is. There are hoardes of people who make their living out of interpreting those documents for thier own profession. Likewise, a board relying solely on the "I know a bad appraisal when I see it" philosophy will also be unable to find the justification for that in USPAP. When it comes to complaints against appraisal activity, the two biggest areas of concern will be appraiser competence and appraiser ethics in the form of misleading appraisals and appraisal reports. Both of these forms of misconduct are very clearly and directly addressed in USPAP. A board should have no trouble applying those standards of conduct in enforcement actions. However, they will have trouble getting USPAP to define exactly what a matched pair analysis is, because it doesn't.

In your "Communicator" article, you argue for some standardized behavior among the state boards. This is a very laudable and achievable goal. Since you apparently don't feel that USPAP should be applied to the state boards when they conduct their investigations, can you tell us which standard should apply instead? Does AARO have a set of guidelines for state board conduct that is comparable, if not more stringent, than USPAP? If USPAP needs to be reworked and the states want input, do they as a group endorse any specific changes, or better yet, do they have an alternative standard of conduct that they would be able to more easily interpret and enforce in a uniform manner on a nationwide basis? If there is an alternative, I'm sure we could all benefit by at least seeing it and comparing it to USPAP. Maybe some or all of those recommendations should be enacted. If the states as a group have no codified alternative, then the complaints made by individual state boards can and probably will be considered by our industry as "whining, griping, bitching, and complaining". Pretty ironic, huh? It's easy to complain. Far more difficult to reach a consensus, even among yourselves, as to a viable alternative.

The real irony is that the state boards could have banded together and developed a standard of practice that exceeds USPAP and FIRREA's requirements. And they could have done it years ago. There isn't anything in either document that prohibits an appraiser from exceeding those standards, only prohibitions against violating those minimums.
As licensed appraisers, we could now be marching to a state beat as being more stringent than the industry beat (USPAP) or the federal beat (FIRREA). Just how organized and unified are the state boards, anyway?

As for me, I don't really care if all the states do adopt a set of standards that exceeds USPAP, as long as those rules apply equally to everyone and level the field for all appraisers and users of appraisals. I would regard anything that works against that concept as being contrary to our survival.

Mr. Blackburn, I realize you did not intend to make more than the one post on this forum. I hope you will reconsider and participate in some dialogue here because I think this is a very important subject and your viewpoint is shared by at least some of our other participants. But please don't tell those of us who might have a different perspective that we have to get out. A difference of opinion (and this includes value opinions) is a difficult thing to judge.


George Hatch

 

[Elliott]

Sam,

Excuse me if I didn't read your whole post. But it
contained the word USPAP.

USPAP is bureaurcrats dream...."yo'all shall explain
completely." So state bureacrats can find any
damm thing they want. Unfortunately there are
some appraisers with a brain (knowledge, experience).

But you can't beat state blurraaracrats....they have
careers to build, 105% pensions to collect.

Thank god E&O people say they will defend you. And
there are some smart attorney types who can easily
beat their butt.

Ignoring the elephant
in the middle of the room
Elliott

 

[jtrotta]

Sammy

I'm not as long winded as some of the others, but-you say; "Putting the best-educated and most qualified appraisers on the street to serve our clients should be our #1 concern".

The appraisal industry is controlled by the "Banking Industry" - they were influential in creating ASB/AQB/ USPAP-Etc., now with that said; can you explain how we can put the best Educated & Most Qualified on the street :?: USPAP was developed as a "Work In Progress", if it has to be changed every single year; if the meaning (s) continually change; if there is always continual change - there is no meaning and therefore you cannot create "The Best Educated" OR The Most Qualified.

Indecision, creates uneducated people and future problems; when a carpenter learns how to build, he doesn't continually have to be re-educated as to how to read a tape, there may be new & different ideas to consider, but he's putting his name on the product and will build it the way he feels comfortable within the system that he learned how to build. An artist paints from within his sole or ability, he/she does not need to work under continual change, he/she feels the need for change from within the work.

Chow - 8)

 

[David C. Johnson]

Members of AppraisersForum:

I, for one, am both humbled and grateful, that on this forum - and often with the patience of Job - we tolerate both arrogance and ignorance, and sometimes even the combination.
____________________

As many of us either strongly suspect, or know for a fact, Hildebrandt is not just a great American, he's is a great man. He's not here to speak for himself, so we'll just figure out how to do it anyway:

April 28, 2002
____________________

The new "Avatar" for the next few of days is in honor of all those, who, at risk to their own well-being, have made a difference, and continue to make a difference, in our profession and in our world.

Sincerely,

David C. Johnson
NC State-Certified General R.E. Appraiser
[email]appraisco@aol.com[/email][/color]

 

[Anonymous]

Well, here goes.

I happen to agree with Mr. Blackburn, though I do believe he should come back to the forum to interact on this topic rather flame and run.

I do not think that a standard 3 review would be needed on all appraisal brought to an investigation by a state regulatory agency. I might think that there would be some that would. But give me a break. All of them? You have almost immediately ruled out state investigators handlling the issues to to geographic competency rules. I am in NC. Dave, I believe you are over near the Triangle somewhere? Could you come to Asheville today and perform an appraisal? I doubt it. Not competently. But could you come over here, with a copy of a complaint appraisal, drive through a subdivision of 150 homes and notice that not one of the comps is from this subdivision, look in public records and see that there were 35 sales last year in that subdivision, the highest is 35% below the opinion of value on the form you have in your hand and not suspect that a violation of USPAP might have occurred?

I have been reading in the section of the forum for some time, but rarely post. The reason. Man what a bunch of complaining and belly aching. This is supposed to be improving the profession. What it really is is Bitching about the Profession.

I appluad a regulatory official for making the post. I just think he should stick around. Perhaps the interaction might end up actually helping to Improve the Profession.

 

[Kevin Shannon]

I agree with the fact that there is way to much bitching and whining going on. The majority of which come from the most frequent posters.
Thats why we've lost so many of the old regulars who actually had something useful to say.

Kevin