Hybrid

[George Hatch]

Yet judged by state boards. USPAP provides the minimum of what is "meaningful" to ALL intended users.


Yet judged by state boards. USPAP provides the minimum of what is required to be "credible" to ALL intended users.


Yet is judged by state boards, in relation to meeting the minimum USPAP requirements and not violating minimum USPAP requirements Standards and comments and not considering FAQs. Because FAQs are not enforceable as they are not USPAP.


Sorry, but the state board judges it all and enters the picture after loans default and lenders suddenly decide they were mislead and what was provided to them was not meaningful. Can we all say Chase at the same time?


USPAP is the external benchmark, and that benchmark is used by state boards to determine if the appraiser provided a meaningful and credible report, according to how the state board interprets USPAP, because let's face it. If the loan was made, the report must have been meaningful and credible, that's why the lenders have underwriters. So, what made all those reports not meaning and credible, 2007-today???

And if all this BS was correct, USPAP would not make the appraiser responsible for the appropriate scope of the work. USPAP would be a two sentence document, Do what the client tells you to do, and make a number that the client can use, solidifying your credibility.

.

You have an exceedingly poor understanding of how both USPAP and the state boards function.
USPAP holds the appraiser responsible for making the SOW decision and client extras can't drop below the minimums, but everything above what those minimums actually require amount to either client-specified extras or appraiser-specified extras that exceed those minimums.

And I LOL at your mischaracterization of client appraisal policies being equal to dictating predetermined value conclusions. Just because a lender asks the appraiser to consider/comment on the relevance of the 3 sales submitted in an ROV doesn't amount to telling the appraiser that they should return the subject's value at $352,000. And no amount of pretzel logic or your "read TILA" mantra is going to alter that fact or how that issue will be argued in front of a judge or any group other than beleaguered fee appraisers.

For the most part appraisers get into trouble on the competency side for not doing what they said they did. Telling lies, as opposed to simply making mistakes. If there is an appraisal problem, it's usually referenced in terms of USPAP, not independent of it. My state regulator has ALWAYS done that, and so have most of the other state boards that I've seen. As for USPAP being an external benchmark, if it's directly referenced by the regs as the minimum standard of conduct for licensees then that's all the integral it needs to be.

With the state boards, where there's a dispute as to the meaning of USPAP that has generally come down to a matter of competency with what the document actually does and doesn't say.

That's not to say that appraisers can ignore their state board's behavior, but unless you have recent examples of your state board penalizing appraisers for choosing inadequate SOW decisions (as opposed to not performing the SOW they claimed) involving inspections then I don't see what facts you have in support of an opinion that state boards are going to move the goalposts for assignments well beyond what the big power users and appraisers agreed upon.

 

[hastalavista]

But I got....

Huff Post? Ok.

When the borrowing public realized how easy it is to manipulate "the number" and no one is responsible, you can sit there and spew the credibility of the garbage to the client.

Right. Ok. Make your argument and good luck!

 

[Meandering]

Huff Post? Ok.




Right. Ok. Make your argument and good luck!

Skipped right past the business insider, NBC News and Washington Post to get to the Huff Post?

Much more there than Huff Post D.

.

 

[Meandering]

You have an exceedingly poor understanding of how both USPAP and the state boards function.
USPAP holds the appraiser responsible for making the SOW decision and client extras can't drop below the minimums, but everything above what those minimums actually require amount to either client-specified extras or appraiser-specified extras that exceed those minimums.

And I LOL at your mischaracterization of client appraisal policies being equal to dictating predetermined value conclusions. Just because a lender asks the appraiser to consider/comment on the relevance of the 3 sales submitted in an ROV doesn't amount to telling the appraiser that they should return the subject's value at $352,000. And no amount of pretzel logic or your "read TILA" mantra is going to alter that fact or how that issue will be argued in front of a judge or any group other than beleaguered fee appraisers.

For the most part appraisers get into trouble on the competency side for not doing what they said they did. Telling lies, as opposed to simply making mistakes. If there is an appraisal problem, it's usually referenced in terms of USPAP, not independent of it. My state regulator has ALWAYS done that, and so have most of the other state boards that I've seen. As for USPAP being an external benchmark, if it's directly referenced by the regs as the minimum standard of conduct for licensees then that's all the integral it needs to be.

With the state boards, where there's a dispute as to the meaning of USPAP that has generally come down to a matter of competency with what the document actually does and doesn't say.

That's not to say that appraisers can ignore their state board's behavior, but unless you have recent examples of your state board penalizing appraisers for choosing inadequate SOW decisions (as opposed to not performing the SOW they claimed) involving inspections then I don't see what facts you have in support of an opinion that state boards are going to move the goalposts for assignments well beyond what the big power users and appraisers agreed upon.

Now George, I did not say appraisal policies dictate predetermined values.

But I also don't ignore that fact that political agendas can more easily be pushed this way either.

https://appraisersforum.com/forums/...on-the-roof-of-subject-property.190716/page-4

https://appraisersforum.com/forums/threads/value-for-solar-system.191383/#post-2314488

https://appraisersforum.com/forums/threads/global-economy-bursting.173768/page-372#post-2317333

And after years and years of reading state board sanctions in my state and from across the country from the multiple threads that used to be posted here everytime some one got sanctioned - mostly posted by Mr. Kennedy - thank you, I have a very good understanding of what state boards sanction appraisers for, and I also have a good understanding after the Oregon (??) "being late on a report is a USPAP violation" , that state boards can make their own rules of what they want to sanction or not.

.

 

[J Grant]

Will there be liability for the appraiser who provides the inspection and sketch?

Its usually a non appraiser who does the inspection and sketch, the inspector does not have liability-imo not a big deal for drive bys if they replace AVM's or BPO's but a rather big deal if it is origination loan purchases or refi;s...not that anyone cares what an appraiser thinks, the stakeholders have the lobbying power so they call the shots.

 

[djd09]

Might as well let a third party select the comparables, make the adjustments, estimated value, and scope away the rest.

The only question an appraiser should have is 'Why do they select the inspectors?' The answer Lies within.

 

[ucbruin]

Its usually a non appraiser who does the inspection and sketch, the inspector does not have liability-imo not a big deal for drive bys if they replace AVM's or BPO's but a rather big deal if it is origination loan purchases or refi;s...not that anyone cares what an appraiser thinks, the stakeholders have the lobbying power so they call the shots.

True...
But this might change in the very near future....

 

[djd09]

Homebuyer Beware: Misleading Real Estate Photography Tricks

An online listing for a house is a lot like an online dating profile. You wouldn't ever lie — better to set honest expectations — but you sure as hell are going to make your situation look as good as possible. That means flattering angles, ruthless editing and, yep, maybe a little Photoshop.

https://www.apartmenttherapy.com/ph...leading-real-estate-photography-tricks-246722

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Fannie and Freddie seem hell bent on going with hybrids. Although, for now, the rumor is for them to perhaps replace BPOs.
Peter spoke to the real world. The Appraiser is liable. End of discussion. All of the caveats in the world don’t fix that.
Be very aware that E & O carriers will be asking if you do hybrids. Your E & O rate will be altered, and I project dramatically increased

i.e.- it's a done deal, so deal with it. You are only needed as cannon fodder.

"Public Trust" is a canard.

A joke, and a cruel one upon the appraiser-intended victim

Will there be liability for the appraiser who provides the inspection and sketch?

What JG said

What's "meaningful and not misleading to intended users" is defined by those users
What's a "Credible Assignment Result" is judged within the context of the intended use.
What's an "Appropriate SOW" for an assignment is identified by the appraiser and in consideration of the above two

The intended use is to bypass any semblance to a thorough appraisal report but to monetize the valuation for the maximum benefit of the lender.​

state boards can make their own rules of what they want to sanction or not.

exactly. I can think of five instances where boards were reversed by higher courts and appraisers spent up to $50,000 (except for the one who was a lawyer and basically went to court, the board paid him and agreed to certain terms which relieved some of the problems in that state.)

 

[George Hatch]

"Nobody wants an appraisal. They just want to know what the value is"

Steven Santora