Is It USPAP Violation or Reviewer's Opinion

[George Hatch]

Reading is fundamental. Read the whole thing in context, especially the explanation at the top.

I don't know why you would even attempt to lift a section in isolation of its context. You know I'm going to check before I allow such a mischaracterization to pass without challenge.

A client asking for information doesn't amount to an attempt to influence the appraiser's objectivity and impartiality.

L: What's the distance to the sewer connection?
A: How dare you ask me a question?

 

[djd09]

Reading is fundamental. Read the whole thing in context, especially the explanation at the top.

I don't know why you would even attempt to lift a section in isolation of its context. You know I'm going to check before I allow such a mischaracterization to pass without challenge.

A client asking for information doesn't amount to an attempt to influence the appraiser's objectivity and impartiality.

surprise surprise surprise you dislike the rule that makes appraisers more independent, impartial, and objective...

 

[George Hatch]

I like it just fine and support those requirements 100%. I'm just telling you it doesn't mean what you are trying to mischaracterize it to mean. You can't show me where the existence of Fannie's own appraisal policy (for example) amounts to an infringement on the appraiser's impartiality and objectivity. Or an attempt to get a desired result. Because it doesn't exist. The same for any other appraisal policy from any other type of user.

Appraiser independence is about objectivity and impartiality, not about an appraiser totally ignoring "meaningful and not misleading to intended users"

 

[djd09]

the rule is clearly stated. no influencing duh

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

How does the govt hold these lenders responsible for the choices they are making if they don't have the discretion to make them?

What banker was held responsible in the 2008 crisis? 1100 bankers went to jail over the S & L crisis. I know appraisers who did appraisals right whose E & O paid out tens of thousands when the RTC declared them at fault without a shred of evidence. One MAI I know was in Denver and his E & O paid out $50,000 over an apartment complex that was going to convert to a condo. That condo never happened, and his report was clearly marked as a hypothetical based upon the as completed value. But the bank lent the money anyway and the apartment owners split town. CG001 was (the late) Mike Pyron in Arkansas was the man who testified against Robert Palmer - an appraiser who got a quid pro quo loan for bringing home the bacon for a 'friend of Bill'. Palmer ended up in jail, proving that not being licensed did not protect you from real sanction. Once Pyron had to testify to Ken Starr, and it became public, every bank in Little Rock blacklisted him. So, Pyron moved to Bentonville and went to work for Wal-Mart and their tax division. He testified before our board when I served on the board of equalization. Who has the most power? Banks? Lenders? FNMA? or, the lowly appraiser.

 

[djd09]

i really hope lenders are not basing decisions on listings...

 

[George Hatch]

What banker was held responsible in the 2008 crisis? 1100 bankers went to jail over the S & L crisis. I know appraisers who did appraisals right whose E & O paid out tens of thousands when the RTC declared them at fault without a shred of evidence. One MAI I know was in Denver and his E & O paid out $50,000 over an apartment complex that was going to convert to a condo. That condo never happened, and his report was clearly marked as a hypothetical based upon the as completed value. But the bank lent the money anyway and the apartment owners split town. CG001 was (the late) Mike Pyron in Arkansas was the man who testified against Robert Palmer - an appraiser who got a quid pro quo loan for bringing home the bacon for a 'friend of Bill'. Palmer ended up in jail, proving that not being licensed did not protect you from real sanction. Once Pyron had to testify to Ken Starr, and it became public, every bank in Little Rock blacklisted him. So, Pyron moved to Bentonville and went to work for Wal-Mart and their tax division. He testified before our board when I served on the board of equalization. Who has the most power? Banks? Lenders? FNMA? or, the lowly appraiser.

Most of those examples happened many years ago. I daresay the legal precedents and the legal arguments appraisers can use to defend their positions have evolved since then, and so has the technical competency of the lawyers who argue those cases. Judges operating solely off their own opinions isn't going to be as prevalent now as back then when nobody really understood the specifics. A legal case that's poorly argued will always have the potential to lead to an unjustified conclusion - can't help that except to use lawyers who understand these specifics.

Nevertheless your point that the lenders get away with acting recklessly or trying to scapegoat appraisers stands. Nobody has ever argued otherwise.

My point is that as of 2024 our choices are to either continue to try to do what we say we do or to not do what we say we do. One of those alternatives has the possibility of extending the whatever is left of our remaining economic lifespan in the market and the other alternative has the high probability of further shortening it. Particularly given the rapid advancement of the AVMs into our book of work.

 

[djd09]

do what we say we do or to not do what we say we do.

it is working so well...they call us racists and end round the public trust to let the mortgage broker estimate value

 

[djd09]

I like it just fine and support those requirements 100%. I'm just telling you it doesn't mean what you are trying to mischaracterize it to mean. You can't show me where the existence of Fannie's own appraisal policy (for example) amounts to an infringement on the appraiser's impartiality and objectivity. Or an attempt to get a desired result. Because it doesn't exist. The same for any other appraisal policy from any other type of user.

Appraiser independence is about objectivity and impartiality, not about an appraiser totally ignoring "meaningful and not misleading to intended users"

that rule is for the crooked banksters...so quit being so dishonest when you are spewing the revaa/crn/taf/gse propaganda

 

[sputnam]

IMO- Buyer "A" loves the visual of the pond and circular drive
Buyer "B" hates the pond for its invitation to mosquitos and hates the circular drive for all the additional maintenance

Both are market indicators, where does one determine the "loss" in value from the cause?

I didn't say that there IS a loss. I provided the definition of depreciation in the context of appraisal and said.... CONSIDER. When you've don't that, you may conclude that there is no loss in value or you may conclude that there is. The point really is, the appraiser didn't mention the circular drive way in the report's description of the subject property.