• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Get right or get out!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Terrel L. Shields

Elite Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
May 2, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
Arkansas
>>As for USPAP being difficult to understand or enforce, I do not see it that way. <<

that is about the only part of Mr. Blackburn's post I solidly agree with. The text is awful and invites interpretations. USPAP can be as punitively enforced as mariauna laws. Same offence could result in a nasty letter in your file or serious suspension.

Internationally we are headed for a convergence of USPAP and International Standards. The Enron mess will speed up this process as our profession become at one with the Accounting profession. When that happens, STD. 5-10 are gone likely.

As for state boards, I would like to see the boards be required to meet the same Std. as we do. I see nothing wrong with a certified review as a fixed requirement to making a determination whether USPAP was violated. The only reason appraisers are licensed is because without it, 70,000 appraisers would clog the legal system completely without an administrative law mechanism. The Boards are a poor substitute for a real judge. That's why they need to avail themselves of defensible reviews before they pass judgment upon the very livelihood of individuals. If the board cannot afford to pay for such a review, then allow the defendant to pay for it. I would rather pay for a review that exonerates me than to not be able to submit such a review but be barbequed by some neophyte whose qualifications are that they work cheap (i.e.-work for the government.)

I could agree that most boards try to be fair, but "trying" to be fair and being fair is two different animals. USPAP needs a major overhaul.
 

bobburnitt

Junior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Well folks,

Bitching & Griping is one of the great building blocks of civilization. How so? I am going to tell you.

Without the bitchers & gripers we would be British subjects right now. Without the bitchers & gripers we would still have slavery.
Without the bitchers & gripers women would not have the vote.
A pattern emerges.

BB a professional bitcher & griper.
 

USPAP Compliant

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
North Carolina
Bob,

Just remember, it was not the bitchin' and gripin' that caused CHANGES to take place. It was ACTION which resulted from the bitchin' and gripin'. If opponents of slavery and women's voting rights had taken no ACTION, thoes things would never have changed.

It is not the masses that create the change, it is the few people that will DO SOMETHING, such as calling, e-mailing, writing and contacting their elected leaders and appointed board members. Things such as alerting the news media of issues and problems, demanding that the professional organizations speak out and demand change and making sure that they are informed, educated and participating in the issues of the day.

So far, I see more bitchin' and gripin' that any real efforts or ACTION from rank and file appraisers. But then again, ACTION requires a lot more effort.


Bob
 

Stephen J. Vertin MAI

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
Illinois
I was not even going to get into this discussion because I seriously felt Mr. Blackburn's comments concerning STD3 had little substance and spoke volumes as to his personality and philosophy. I figured, he was basically saying some regulators do not want to follow USPAP. If you do not like it you are a crier and whiner. However, I felt an under current that the only one crying was Blackburn, due to pressure for compliance. I do need to say, if that is the best argument our regulators can come up with for non-compliance with STD3, we seriously need to consider the alternatives. Furthermore, I felt George's answer was polite and to the point and encompassed everything I could have said.

Than Brad Ellis states:

"Those who favored strict compliance with SR-3 made NO exceptions. They believe that ANY TIME you investigate an appraiser it must be done by another appraiser and under SR-3".

After Brad's comment I felt compelled to reply. Brad I do not know how many times someone has to bust you out on this forum for your direct mis-quotes of others or your direct mis-quote of USPAP. However, I would guess this is at least the fifth or sixth time. Please, show me where Tom said, anywhere, at any point, during any conversation, STD3 reviews were required in all regulatory situations?

Furthermore, I would not believe any thing the State of Illinois had to say, and I would urge others to have the same scepticism. Especially, when it comes to appraisal, appraisal methodology, standards, or USPAP as a whole. They make more mistakes than Brad in providing information.

To me STD3 is quite clear, p32, 1108 through 1111 states:

"In performing an appraisal review assignment involving a real property or personal property appraisal, an appraiser acting as a reviewer must develop and report a credible opinion as to the quality of another appraiser's work and must clearly disclose the scope of work performed in the assignment."

The comment section, same page, line 1112 through 1117 states:

"Appraisal review is the act or process of developing and communicating an opinion about the quality of all or part of a completed work or service performed by another appraiser in a real property or personal property appraisal assignment. The reviewer's opinion about quality must encompass the completeness, adequacy, relevance, appropriateness, and reasonableness of the work under review, developed in the context of the requirements applicable to that work."

This is pretty clear stuff. It basically says, if you are an appraisers and are going to make comment on someone else appraisal under review, especially in an adversarial setting, you need to comply with STD3. It does not say if you are going to check on someone's experience, education, class attendance, back ground, etc, etc......., you must comply with STD3. It say if you are going to review an appraisal.

What is funny to me Brad is you advocate Illinois skip STD3 because an appraiser did 100 properties using 3 comps. Where does it say in USPAP, as clearly as it states STD3 reviews are required, an appraisers can not use the same 3 comps when doing multiple properties? Oh I forgot, we had a similar discussion before and you could not come up with its location in USPAP. Therefore, you are advocating Illinois ignore actual standards to enforce made up standards. This is a major problem and is pretty much how Illinois operates.

Furthermore, if expense is at issue in matters of justice why do we even bother having hearings? Would it not be cheaper to just line up the accused and administer regulatory or criminal punishment? I guess that concept would fly in the face of biblical principles such as righteousness and justice not to mention a violation of our Constitution. Gee, all these people talking about fairness, the right thing, justice and a level playing field, are getting in the way of mashing anyone who disagrees with some regulators. It is so hard to build an old boys club in this modern world. I am crying for you all. I feel your pain.

Some regulators, not most, do not want a paper trail. They do not want the defense going over their work. They do not want to be held responsible for what they say or have their work critically examined. Why? Because it is to hard and expensive? Because, anyone who wants them to, is bitching and crying? Get real. Who said appraising was easy or any form of enforcement was cheap? Who said people would not gripe and sue when others clearly violate their constitutional rights?

I believe the real reason, at least in the State of Illinois, they do not want STD3, is they do poor work. When closely scrutinized it falls a part. That most of what they are saying has no bases in USPAP, it is something they were taught by their mentors 35 years ago and in their minds it has become so imbedded it has become their delusional part of USPAP. Not complying with STD3 is unethical. If it is unethical we need to punish those who do so. They are part of the problem. They are not the solution.

Some regulators do not understand there are a number of ways to perform appraisal reports. That there are many ways of adjusting, measuring, and analyzing. This is evidenced by our own text. However, this fact has been ignored in a number of transcript I have read from the State of NC. Many of these regulators upholding these rouge practices are little more than vigilantly groups putting forth their personal adjectives. I need to make this very clear. This analysis is not applicable to all regulators. Like the bad cop, I believe bad regulators are few and far in between, but none the less they exist. To say they do not is a blatant misconception of reality.

Furthermore, I do need to add, at this time in history, I am surprised at how many good regulators there really are working for Government. There are a lot of men a women who want to do the right thing. My hats are off to them. I attribute this due to being a newly formed segment of regulations. A lot of people want to do the right thing. They purposely extend their efforts into public serve to make sure the ball gets rolling in the right direction. However, I am not sure this can continue over any sustained period. If anyone believes government attracts the cream of employees over the long term, I suggest you go to most court houses in this country. Can government attract the best appraisers over the long term? Do they attract the cream of anything over long periods?

Even if you are a regulator who believes you can see a good report from a bad, do you really believe all appraisers can? Do you think 20 years from now, everyone will be as qualified as you? If so, you have more faith in Government than most. Because of the long term, it is imperative we set-up rules and regulations that can be followed by the appraisers of tomorrow. And that can not be accomplished by ignoring the rules of today.

Steve Vertin
 

David C. Johnson

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
<span style='color:darkblue'>In part, Brad Ellis posts as follows:

"Using SR-3 in this case would have simply been overkill in terms of fees."

And also:

"Why increase the expenses of regulation when it is not necessary?"

Funny.

My guess is few here on AppraisersForum believe that less than $5 is too expensive for compliance with the law. Such an SR-3 effort might have taken 10 to 15 minutes, or so, to do right, Right? It's enough to make you wonder if he really understands SR-3 options (i.e., "scope of work") all that well.

In such a case, a standard boilerplate SR-3 could be instantly completed, signed and dated. Then if the questioned comparables actually did, in fact, Not Exist as claimed, it would be more believable since there would be some (legal) accountability on the part of the person who made, and/or signed-off on, such a finding, claim or charge. Hey, Illinois may not have too much credibility -- even these days -- for getting things right. The total Law Enforcement picture has probably been questionable there ever since Al Capone owned half the law enforcement, judges, juries and politicians in the City of Chicago. See the following hyperlink:</span>

Sure, Anyone Can Make a Mistake, But GD, Illinoise !!
<span style='color:darkblue'>
Illinois makes over twice the number of mistakes than the next highest screw-up/lawless state does in death penalty cases alone (there are several such "noteworthy" states in the nation). And evidence indicates other types of bogus convictions of the innocent (or mainly innocent) are not far behind in that particular state. If it turns out Brad is too busy to read from the hyperlink titled:

"Illinois Governor's Commission on Capital Punishment
Click HERE for the entire report"


...which is located a couple of inches down on that hyperlinked page, or read from any of the other included hyperlinks on the page that mainly feature Illinois, he can let me know and I will send him to a page where he can get the picture in about 5 seconds (with IL at the very TOP OF THE LIST which includes its outstanding numbers compared to other states).

I will do one better than that -- I will summarize it for him: Illinois typically makes more such "judicial mistakes" as any other 10 randomly chosen states combined. And get this -- the judges, whether "real ones" or board members -- are all chosen in basically the same way there, to my knowledge. When it comes to more than questionable appraiser-regulation-performance, there may be nothing particularly hard to understand about that state at all. Here's another pertinent hyperlink:</span>

[url=http://www.chicagohs.org/history/capone.html]INFLUENCE LIVES!: Good Ol' Al Capone -- Dead & Buried, But Never Forgotten!

Illinois, give some thought to giving us a break! OK?

Let's get it right !

Right now !

Thanks.

dcj[/color]
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
David,

I read your re-type of portions of Standard 3. Here are my questions? And David, just so you know, I love playing devil's advocate.

1. Put yourself in a regulators position. You are going to do SR3 reviews on some or all of the complaints. David, I think you are in NC, over near Raleigh. Can you explain to me how a Raleigh based appraiser can come to the Asheville area and meet the Geographical competence rule? You say that the state should sub out the review? OK, to who? Suppose they have subbed out the review work to Appraiser Bob. Appraiser Bob has a complaint filed against him. It goes to court. Bob's atty says, Mr. State regulator, if Bob is so bad, how come did you send him all that work to tell you if other peoples work was bad? Wouldnt you only send that kind of work to appraisers you thought to be good and qualified?

2. State law allows for any employee of the state or other form of government, to be an appraiser and not have to follow USPAP. The boards are following the law. Perhaps not the one you want them to follow, but they are following one. I may not agree with it either, but that was specifically enacted along with the appraiser's act. If you want it changed, quit running around saying what about USPAP and get your legislator to write the bill to change it.

3. So, now the law is changed. As a Jurisdiction, I say, excuse me, but I am claiming Jurisdictional Exception. Before your say it was only intended for a specific part of USPAP, yes that is what is says. But what it does not do is define what ..."only that part shall be void..." Ok, as a regulator I say the part that begins on page one and ends on the last page. It does not say I can not do that.

My point here David is that there seem to be a few people on this site who think they are the one and only authority on USPAP and SR3 reviews. As stated above, you may not like my arguments, but all are supportable and defendable. Because they may not agree with you does not make them wrong.
 

Don Clark

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Virginia
8)

David & Bill:

Just a though, that I have expressed on other forums as well.......One thing that i believe would be helpful since we are generally talking about appraisals that are covered by federal requirements, would be to have another level of appeal if a particular state reached a decision that could impact the future work of an appraiser by revocation or suspension of license/certification. This could become a function of the Appraisal Subcommittee of the FFIEC(ASC) with an extension of authority by a minor change in FIRREA. This would allow an appraiser to appeal the decision of a state where the appraiser felt unjustly treated by a state board or commission. I know it can work. In the early days of licensure/certification, there was a case in Nevada where a young lady had been charged with wrong doing by the state board/commission. A formal hearing was held and a punishment was to be enacted which if memory serves me right, was to suspend her license for a time. Having no other recourse, she appealed to the ASC, which back then still believed it had some power. Seems that as part of her appeal she noted that the complaintant was a competitor who worked directly for the Chairman of the state board, and the Chairman of the board had voted against her at the board hearing. The ASC requested, and received a new hearing before the board, with the Chairman not voting, and full disclosure of the relationship of the complainant and chairman. I believe she won on appeal.

I believe we need such a process today.

Don
 

USPAP Compliant

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
North Carolina
Bill,

I would like for you to post or send me the "state law" that exempts government employees from USPAP. I was not aware of such a law.

The NCAB (and some other state boards as well) has never claimed to be exempt from following USPAP or from being required to do SR 3 reviews. What they HAVE claimed is that they are NOT DOING REVIEWS at all....simply doing an "investigation". This is the official stance of the NCAB and I have heard it stated many times at board meetings, by board members and by staff.

The definition of jusisditional exception covers departure from USPAP when a part or parts of USPAP is contrary to LAW or PUBLIC POLICY.
Jusiditional exception must be supported by a judge, a court ruling or legislative body (by passing a law). Jusisdictional exception is NOT something that an individual can choose to invoke without the proper support. An indididual is not a jusisdiction.

I do not believe and never have that state investigators are geographicaly competent to do investigations (or reviews) in markets where they have never worked and are unfamiliar with. When investigators ( at least in NC) go out on an investigation, they often will contact or visit an appraiser not involved in the complaint and gain local insight from him or her. When this is done, the "local appraiser" is not told who the parties in the complaint are. This is no different from a police investigation where many individuals may be interviewed to see what they know about the case.

I would like to see the complaintant appear at EVERY disciplinary hearing, so he can be questioned by both the State and the defense. It seems only fair that a defendent should be able to question the appraiser who filed the complaint. It also seem only fair that the appraiser who filed the complaint have the oportunity to demonstarte WHY he filed the complaint and WHY and HOW the apprisal in question is faulty.

Again, it seems like the easy answer to this SR 3 question is to alow the defendent, the compaintant or the State call for a SR 3 REVIEW (as in not just an investigation) if they so desire. In most (not all) of the cases I have seen in a hearing, the defendent was lucky NOT to be fully reviewed.



Bob
 

David C. Johnson

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
<span style='color:darkblue'>Bob,

Well said. I am just now reading your latest post just five minutes prior to posting this one.

The following is an idea you have expressed for many months. I agree. Also, your suggestion about the "payment plan details" you outlined in a previous post would do it for states that appear to have very limited budgets. (Of course, for those who may not be aware of it, we have plenty in NC -- the NCAB has an extra two million dollars in cash on hand.)

"Again, it seems like the easy answer to this SR 3 question is to
allow the defendant, the compaintant or the State call for a SR 3
REVIEW (as in not just an investigation) if they so desire. In most
(not all) of the cases I have seen in a hearing, the defendant was
lucky NOT to be fully reviewed."

Bill-NC,

I thought some of your questions sounded real familiar. Sorry for not responding to your earlier post in this thread on the 13th. I read it before going out of town on Friday, and kinda forgot about it until this recent post of yours. I am not completely sure I am catching the full drift of all your points, but I will make some comments after reciting your post below.

"I read your re-type of portions of Standard 3. Here are my questions?
And David, just so you know, I love playing devil's advocate."

I am not sure what you are referring to with the text: "re-type of portions of Standard 3." Are you speaking of anything I have written in this thread, or another thread? I have not quoted STD-3 here in a while that I can remember.

"1. Put yourself in a regulators position. You are going to do SR3 reviews
on some or all of the complaints. David, I think you are in NC, over near
Raleigh. Can you explain to me how a Raleigh based appraiser can come
to the Asheville area and meet the Geographical competence rule?"

When I worked for an MAI in Tennessee, we were sometimes called to appraise in far reaches of the state (from Nashville). An experienced appraiser can sometimes attain competency very quickly. "Associating with" or just getting some advice from other real estate professions who live in the area is one of the means. There are others. Actually, some believe it is sometimes possible for an appraiser to get a bit to close to be able to read his/her own market as accurately as an "outsider" at times -- I believe I have seen that happen. In fact, it was partly for this concern that we were asked to appraise in such areas (and also sometimes there may have been the concern for bias in some smaller towns with few appraisers, with most also being active brokers and/or developers). For example, if an area or subdivision is selling well, it does not matter that the land use to be the farm of that old weirdo years ago. The market is what we are to emulate, nothing more, nothing less. Checking for planned or likely neighborhood changes (zoning, annexation, road projects, etc.) with the correct municipal departments is important, as well as changes or trends in the local economy. But it certainly can be done, and routinely is done by appraisers all across the country.

But I am missing something here with the point of your question. If an appraisal review is warranted, what are you suggesting should be done to get it completed? Yes, if the investigator is not competent to do such appraising / reviewing, then it appears that someone should be hired to do it who is competent. What is the alternative, Bill-NC? In the case you described, in your previous post, (which I will reprint right below this paragraph), it sure sounds like there may be a problem with the appraisal you describe. But are you suggesting that there need be no STD-3 review in such a case? How would it be determined if there were very substantive and consequential errors, say, effecting the appraised valuation (i.e., an erroneous value), if no legitimate review was conducted? Should it make any difference in the judgment or the sentencing of the appraiser if the value is way wrong, or it appears, on full review, to be just right? Here is your example from your first post in this thread:

"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?"

Yes, as you say, under the circumstances you describe, I would very much suspect a problem. However, "suspecting" a problem is not the same as making a case and proving a problem for a jury (i.e., board members) to base their decision on, or for an appeals court to base their decision on. There may be reasons that singular reliance on sales in the immediate subdivision might constitute an inferior appraisal than would be attained by extending the search for better comparables. If the subject property is twice as large as the largest property (land or improvement, or both), and nearby sales of similarly sized properties exist, perhaps the situation would call for more similar properties for the analysis. What if all other homes that sold in the subdivision are aged split-levels and the subject is a new ranch, while nearby subdivisions include the sale of similar new ranches. Sure there may be a sizable downward adjustment for perhaps being "super-adequate" or overbuilt for the subdivision, but these adjustments may be less than fhe cumulative adjustments required for any of the 35 sales you mentioned. These things would need to be checked out. "Probably guilty," so therefore "officially decreed guilty," don't get it. More and more residential assignments are going to be the difficult assignments. We need protection from investigators and boards who like to "shooting from the hip." Bill-NC, otherwise, maybe the appraiser should just provide the number that everyone expects from a casual observation. It is hard to "go wrong" doing that, but it is not appraising, it's CYA careerism politics.

Bill-NC, by the way, I grew up in Brevard (since the fourth grade, anyway). I use to work for Xerox in Asheville, and later appraised a few residential properties there when I worked in Hendersonville. You probably know or have heard of Bart Bryson, MAI, of Bryson & Associates. He is our second to the newest board member.

"You say that the state should sub out the review? OK, to who? Suppose they
have subbed out the review work to Appraiser Bob. Appraiser Bob has a
complaint filed against him. It goes to court. Bob's atty says, Mr. State
regulator, if Bob is so bad, how come did you send him all that work to
tell you if other peoples work was bad? Wouldnt you only send that kind
of work to appraisers you thought to be good and qualified?"

Bill-NC, first, just a couple of minor "points of order": Bob Ipock is in this thread; he's probably a real good appraiser; but more importantly, you don't want him on your case; so let's make a point of pointing out that he ain't the Bob we are referring to! Next, you wrote the following words: "...if Bob is so bad..." Please remember reviewers actually only make judgment opinions on a specific work product. We are not critiquing the appraiser, but the appraisal. This is a conceptual distinction that may be more important than we sometimes may think. In this case, Bob may be a competent appraiser, but performed a poor appraisal for some reason. Of course, if he performed a fraudulent appraisal, he is a bad appraiser in my book -- but still, keep in mind that as reviewers we do not need to comment on his up bringing, only his appraisals that are under review.

Don't get the wrong idea, Bill-NC. I believe, like Bob Ipock, that the major, or worst case the second biggest problem at the NCAB, is their lack of adequate prosecution! I am not considered by anyone that I know of to be "light on crime" where appraising is concerned. The number or revocations in this state since the beginning of the NCAB can be counted on less than one hand, and you may be aware that the FBI just uncovered the biggest mortgage fraud scheme in the history of the entire country right here in this state.

Some of our board members have disciplinary records (the ones that have not had them expunged), and they judge the rest of us, Right? In fact, statistically speaking, they have a higher offense rate by far than the typical NC appraiser. Now that sure may be something we should be concerned about. Regardless, my suggestion, as part of legal strategy for the prosecution, would be to avoid hiring review appraisers who have particularly long appraisal rapp sheets. For one, the revelation of the chosen reviewer's record could be an embarrassment on appeal.

"2. State law allows for any employee of the state or other form of government,
to be an appraiser and not have to follow USPAP."

No, that is not correct to my knowledge. If you are trying to say that the NCAB's investigators can be appraisers, this is true. However, if they are only acting in the capacity of a fact finding investigator, they may not state their professional opinions as appraisers about the work product of other appraisers (legally or ethically). If they do, or plan to, they must adhere to USPAP, and particularly its STD-3. By the way, "complaining" as it appears to have been characterized in this thread, has improved the NCAB slightly. They now do STD-3 reviews every now and then where they did not before the "complaining."

"The boards are following the law. Perhaps not the one you want them to follow,
but they are following one."

No, that is not correct to my knowledge. They are in clear violation of the law. The NCAB very regularly allows their investigators to go so far as to express value opinions about properties without even having inspected the property, let alone appraised the property -- whether it is in town or not. These properties have been the subjects of official hearing charges at the NCAB where appraisers' livelihoods have been at stake. Does this sound Kosher to you, Bill-NC?

"I may not agree with it either, but that was specifically enacted along with the
appraiser's act."

No, it was not.

"If you want it changed, quit running around saying what about USPAP and get
your legislator to write the bill to change it."

Bill-NC, go to the following URL:

www.boardwatch.org/htmfiles/BoardMemberReportCard.htm

Mr. Smith was trying real hard to force through a change in the law such that STD-3 would not have to be adhered to in this state. Despite his best and "most creative" efforts, he failed. The law does not need to be changed; I am interested in the NCAB abiding by the existing law.

"3. So, now the law is changed. As a Jurisdiction, I say, excuse me, but I am
claiming Jurisdictional Exception. Before your say it was only intended for a
specific part of USPAP, yes that is what is says. But what it does not do is
define what ..."only that part shall be void..." Ok, as a regulator I say the part
that begins on page one and ends on the last page. It does not say I can not
do that."

Nope, USPAP is very clear on the circumstances the JE can be invoked. This is not one of them. Oh, some currently at the NCAB tried screaming JE, but you do not hear that much anymore. It just does not hold water. Carefully read all of what USPAP has to say about the JE. And also read the Foundation's Question & Answer publications.

"My point here David is that there seem to be a few people on this site who
think they are the one and only authority on USPAP and SR3 reviews."

Name one. Not me. I have never described myself as such. But if such creatures as USPAP Experts do exist, you will likely find some of the very best here on this website -- and at least are some experts who will take their time to discuss it with us. Just to name two, I consider George Hatch and Tom Hildebrandt to be USPAP experts -- they have done their homework in a big way for many years. I suspect many of those at the Foundation -- both past and present -- might agree. No, I get the impression that neither of these guys takes the attitude that they are "the one and only authority on USPAP and SR-3 reviews."

"As stated above, you may not like my arguments, but all are supportable and
defendable. Because they may not agree with you does not make them wrong."

The fact that some of them are factually incorrect does make some of them wrong. But actually, Bill-NC, I am not real sure what your "arguments" are, so, generally, I do not necessarily disagree with you.

Regards,

David C. Johnson</span>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Top

AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks