Is It USPAP Violation or Reviewer's Opinion

[Terrel L. Shields]

.states can write laws but they cannot be unconstitutional well duh

Don't we wish that were true....

West Virginia-based appraiser Lori Noble

Has had run in for years with that board. That's why she has been active in trying to figure out where they are coming from. Obviously, they are coming from a culture of corruption. Only GH is regulated by the perfect board where they do no wrong. The rest of us wonder how/why/when the sword will fall. Damocles hangs over us in most states and it is pretty much a crap shoot to see if you are sanctioned or not.

Remember, in OK a review appraiser (duly licensed) will look over your report and the board will rubber stamp the results. The insurance commissioner is the chair. 4 members are appraisers and 4 are not - the chair, the Real estate rep, the 'lay person' rep, and a bank rep.

 

[djd09]

Does a client or a user have the right to decide what extras, if any, that they consider meaningful to their decision making? You seem believe they have no such right.

it is worse then sitting at a rigged poker game...

 

[George Hatch]

My argument is that these "requirements" should be included in USPAP and anything not in USPAP should not be required for a FRT. Nor should it be actionable by a board.

A - USPAP isn't just about FRTs or mortgage lending

B - telling clients that they can't require the appraiser to do anything other than the one thing is as rigid/inflexible as is imaginable. Reducing choices and flexibility is the opposite of allowing choices and flexibility.

C - people already complain that the 50 pages at the front end of USPAP is way too much to read, that minor revisions @ 2yr or 4yr intervals amount to a moving target that nobody can keep track of what these minimums are now. Adding 10,000 pages of details to cover every client's minimums just makes that problem worse.

D - Skimming through some lenders policies usually only takes a few minutes. It's not that much of a burden on appraisers.

E - clients or users will sometimes add a 1-time request for a certain assignment. Why bundle that in with the rest?

F - If the users requested and the appraiser agreed then what's the problem with holding the appraiser to account for what they proceeded to do?

----------
If the problem in these examples is board members running wyld then adding off label criteria to their enforcement actions then "decriminalizing" most appraiser offenses in order to prevent the innocents from being victimized by the board members is the most illogical way there is of resolving that problem. It's exactly the opposite of improving up the level of play among appraisers. How about teaching the board members to stick to the requirements that are in print and refrain from using the Edwin Meese version of "I can't define what the problem is here but I know a bad appraisal when I see one"?

 

[George Hatch]

Do you honestly believe that the terms of this assignment required one to address circle drives, sprinkler systems etc. Really? Really?

But they didn't violate USPAP

Of course I don't believe that was never a requirement or expectation. I think whoever called that out as a problem is acting in error and I have been saying so all along throughout this thread.

The difference between where you're at on this and where I'm at is that I attribute to the actions of the individual board members to those individuals and not to the system itself. No different than when any other reviewer gets carried away and starts moving the goalpost. That is, no different except to the more serious effect on the licensee's status.

There is no govt agency or any other entity that enforces a given set of rules which is immune from human frailty. Including errors and including conflicts of interest when those are afoot. But that doesn't justify decriminalizing obvious misconduct across the board for the sole purpose of protecting the appraisers from board-member incompetency. If it's possible for a board to act appropriately then it doesn't become an unreasonable ask just because a couple of them have made mistakes or a couple of them have engaged in conflicts of interest for personal gain. Or a couple members haven't filed their taxes.

If you want to deregulate the appraisal business except for FRTs then a lot of people share that opinion. The southerners bring that up every couple years or so. Just don't be surprised if taking the brakes off the business (except for FRTs) has unintended consequences, starting with what happens when the barrier to entry into the business is removed. I gua-ruhn-tee.

 

[George Hatch]

it is worse then sitting at a rigged poker game...

Just to reiterate - you believe a user has no right to require extra comps or a comment on landscaping? Or anything else. No rights at all as the only user of that appraisal report.

Would you change your mind about any of that if your clients were paying you the fees to which you are entitled?

 

[djd09]

you do know they have civil courts and criminal courts for all the whiners...99.9% of their b.s. wouldn't even get to the floor

 

[djd09]

Just to reiterate - you believe a user has no right to require extra comps or a comment on landscaping? Or anything else. No rights at all as the only user of that appraisal report.

it is great idea to let the bankster control the appraiser...ask eppraiseit

 

[George Hatch]

It's their decision making we are attempting to inform, it's their money that's going out the door, it's their responsibility for who they choose to engage and what appraisal they choose to use.

Mortgage lending is a heavily regulated business. How does the govt hold these lenders responsible for the choices they are making if they don't have the discretion to make them?

 

[Digger88]

Just goes to show when you're in the crosshairs they can hammer anyone

 

[djd09]

B. No person is allowed to influence or attempt to influence the development, reporting, result, orreview of an appraisal through coercion, extortion, collusion, compensation, inducement,intimidation, bribery, or any other manner including, but not limited to:

requiring a listing is a violation of air...