Is It Time To Revoke The Appraisal Foundation's Authority

[TD Morgan]

The post starts with a false premise. Nothing limits TAF to real property. Congress has only recognized some of the work that TAF does in real property, but there is nothing that "limits" TAF to real property only. TAF has been a multi-disciplinary entity since its inception.

Ok, I have to ask a question here because of my stupidity. What exactly can they do because I think some people are thinking they can do what they can't do? I don't want to take much of your time, but some people are talking like they can do things that other people are saying they can't. Like state related is where some people seem to be in disagreement.

I changed the wording. I understand that TAF deals with all facets of valuation. FIRREA doesn't give a crap about anything other than real estate, which is all that most of us care about. I think the BOT should focus on real estate, as well. That is my point.

But, given DWiley's past experiences, I can understand why he reacts the way he does to minor misstatements.

If the ASC wants to let us know what it actually does, it should publish those results.

 

[George Hatch]

I really don't see how it's possible to have a serious discussion about this topic without clearing up some of the erroneous assumptions that are being used as the basis of some of the faulty rationale being floated here. AFAICT Danny is doing you a solid just by participating in this discourse. You should consider the value of his personal experience and insight.

The ASC is a government agency. Their website contains their correspondence to the various states. If you're actually interested in what the ASC does you could start by sifting through these public records.

 

[TD Morgan]

. AFAICT Da

I really don't see how it's possible to have a serious discussion about this topic without clearing up some of the erroneous assumptions that are being used as the basis of some of the faulty rationale being floated here. AFAICT Danny is doing you a solid just by participating in this discourse. You should consider the value of his personal experience and insight.

The ASC is a government agency. Their website contains their correspondence to the various states. If you're actually interested in what the ASC does you could start by sifting through these public records.

I did not mean to offend him with my comment, and am not sure what I wrote that might be touchy. I worked for the assessor and a couple other governmental agencies and was not disparaging the public employee. I simply indicated that I understood, given his experiences, why he might be sensitive. I appreciate anything he might be able to share.

If you want to comment on the "faulty rationale" feel free. I am open to learning about that which I don't know. When you talk about rationale, please differentiate it from suppositions, presumptions, and opinions. If there are incorrect facts, share them.

Mr. Wiley didn't give a lot of details, but my understanding is that the ASC is more suited to state oversight of activities related to real estate appraisals and how they interact with banking safety. If he wants to share more information about what he did as the chair of the ASB, I would be very interested. But I doubt there is a lot on the ASC website about the specifics. And I am not going to send a FOIA request to them just to find out what they do. The topic of this thread was about the lack of direct control over TAF.

I am not going to sift through the ASC website. I am sure there is great stuff there. I contacted them directly, and their inability to do anything or get involved with matters that deal with TAF is all I know about them. If they have oversight of TAF, they indicated to me that it does not amount to any real control. They simply have a "monitoring framework" for TAF. That is the intent of my comments. If they have other activities, those are not the subject of anything I have read or posted here.

ASC: "To provide federal oversight of State appraiser regulatory programs and a monitoring framework for the Appraisal Foundation and the Federal Financial Institutions Regulatory Agencies in their roles to protect federal financial and public policy interests in real estate appraisals utilized in federally related transactions."

My premise is that TAF is not a public agency, yet it has immense control over the regulatory environment of the states and doesn't (really) have to answer to anyone. If this is faulty, let me know. But it is how I see it.

 

[DWiley]

I was not offended in any way. There are many, including Mr. Bunton at the TAF, who can verify that I have leaped a significant amount of criticism on the TAF over the years. So, please do not take my clarifications as "defense." I follow the work of the TAF very closely because it can have big ramifications on my profession. It seems that your keen interest in the TAF is a relatively recent development, and my only goal is to provide some insight to you (and others reading this thread) into the workings of TAF and ASC. Frankly, most do not understand that well, and some of the erroneous assumptions made in this thread are quite common in the appraisal community.

The role of the ASC is to "monitor" the TAF, not to "control" it. There is a high degree of independence in the work of the TAF, and there has to be given their Congressionally authorized role in the real property appraisal world.

But there is also a degree of accountability to the ASC (at least there is for the real property work of the TAF). I have never attended a meeting of the TAF where the ASC was not also present.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

(this is meant to be tongue-in-cheek)

I'm old and catch on slow

The problem with the ASC and TAF is that "thinking what is best" for "us" while mandating licensing for all appraisers means they are not thinking about "us" rather they are thinking about bank appraisers. While the majority of appraisals relate to a "bank" (lender) there are a lot of appraisals done for estates, legal proceedings, condemnation, etc. and thus rules written specifically for the banking industry do not fit what is a far broader profession than TAF appears to understand. I think that is part of the AI complaint.

AI - whom I am not that big a fan thereof - has a point. There does need to be different standards of conduct - one for government work, one for lending work, one for private parties (in my opinion). The single USPAP standard is flawed in that USPAP allows banks and the 3 F's - FHA, Freddy Mac, & Fannie Mae in particular, to write "special" (formerly known as "supplemental") rules that are conflicted (in my opinion) and fly in the face of what was standard appraisal procedure for decades. And, over time, the 3 Fs seem to spread a little further and a little further into the essence of what was USPAP territory. The appraiser has a problem They cannot serve two masters. You hate the one and love the other or visa versa.

 

[George Hatch]

Puhleeze

Assignment history disclosure and analyzing the sales history are the only two requirements that can be related specifically to mortgage lending, and even those have relevancy in at least some other types of assignments outside of mortgage lending. SMT-10 is specific to FRT transactions but it only applied in those assignments, not through all of appraisal practice; besides which they already moved that material to an AO.

There's no appraisal standard our profession could come up with that didn't go straight to Appraiser Ethics and Appraiser Competency as the cornerstone and which didn't include requirements for tailoring services to the needs of their respective users. That includes providing certain disclosures intended to convey the context in which that work was engaged and is being performed.

I firmly believe you would chafe equally under any other appraisal standard regardless of content because your primary beef is having the outside standard in the first place and being accountable to the state appraisal board.


I agree with AIs point that TAF shouldn't be competing with them in the education business. But the fiction is downright laughable that appraisers can't be competitive in the market because it's just too much work to add in whichever of the 15 statements and 2 summaries SR2-2a requires to whatever else an outside standard may require.

 

[TD Morgan]

The role of the ASC is to "monitor" the TAF, not to "control" it. There is a high degree of independence in the work of the TAF, and there has to be given their Congressionally authorized role in the real property appraisal world.

My simple premise is that TAF should be COMPLETELY accountable to the government and to us appraisers.

Why a private company was ever given the authority TAF has over the states and appraisers is beyond me. I think it is time to rethink how the regulatory framework operates.

Thanks for your input on the issues. Your time is appreciated.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

assignment history disclosure and analyzing the sales history are the only two requirements that can be related specifically to mortgage lending

The issue is the "rules" created by the GSEs themselves - what we used to call "supplemental standards" which are, in effect, a separate standard...a standard that varies from the individual client. That's the issue, not USPAP sans supplemental standards via SOW. Every lender is a different "standard" therefore.

Further, the banks have underwriting standards that conflict with appraisal practice and that continually is a problem for appraisers. How many of these idiotic post-report requests to analyze a contract ... a contract modified because of the appraisal itself? That's like asking an engineer to reconfigure the plans after the bridge is built...and for free. And then you have to do it...

 

[George Hatch]

Meh, that's all just client stuff. Stuff we would be doing regardless of which standard was in play.

Appraisers can't dictate what is and isn't meaningful to clients.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Meh, that's all just client stuff. Stuff we would be doing regardless of which standard was in play.

Appraisers can't dictate what is and isn't meaningful to clients.

There is no reason why an appraiser should respond post-report to anything except actual errors. Not once. No other profession tolerates it. We are mandated to address it. Why?

And what are these "meaningful" things that are required? Post-report changes in the contract. Addressing the "cost approach" after the fact because of what? Insurance issues? Rebuild letters? Post-report demands for inspections when a hurricane comes within a hundred miles of you? We have a thread about someone being asked to redo a 3 year old report? Bull S***...

And as an after thought, if that is normal "client stuff", then why do the clients from the legal practice and estate practice normally not have any such issues? I have done 4 in a row where I've not had a single peep from the clients even though it involved over 20 properties between the four. What bank will not "stip" you within 20 reports?