Judge Rules Appraiser/Lender Owe no duty of care

[Mike Ault]

What's common sense is in any other industry other than the appraisal business

With regard to products liability, a defendant is liable when the plaintiff proves that the product is defective, regardless of the defendant’s intent. It is irrelevant whether the manufacturer or supplier exercised great care; if there is a defect in the product that causes harm, he or she will be liable for it.

Yet appraisers get to CYA with intended user clauses and with no regard to how their "product" affects others.

I am afraid, you're destined to lose your appeal.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Yet appraisers get to CYA with intended user clauses

The fact that you keep on calling them clauses demonstrates your lack of knowledge of appraisal regulations.

 

[Huds_Harm]

The fact that you keep on calling them clauses demonstrates your lack of knowledge of appraisal regulations.

Intended User Sample Clauses | Law Insider

Sample Contracts and Business Agreements

www.lawinsider.com

 

[Huds_Harm]

The fact that you keep on calling them clauses demonstrates your lack of knowledge of appraisal regulations.

https://appraisersforum.com/forums/threads/appraisal-review-sample-and-or-cya-statements.224901/

Would you prefer me call them clauses or CYA statements?

 

[Raven59]

As an appraiser, I've never viewed it that way. The requirements set by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), including the crucial intended user clauses, are part of our professional standards. These clauses aren't about dodging responsibility; they're about clarifying who the appraisal is for and how it should be used.

The goal is to ensure appraisals are accurate and reliable, and these protections help define the scope of our work. They're there to ensure we can do our jobs without being unfairly blamed for issues outside our control as long as we follow the rules and do our work diligently.

While your perspective is understandable, highlighting concerns about consumer protection and accountability, it's essential to recognize that the USPAP standards are there to strike a balance. They help us provide unbiased and accurate valuations while protecting us from unfounded liability claims. So, these standards ensure accountability and provide necessary protections for appraisers.

 

[Fernando]

What's common sense is in any other industry other than the appraisal business

With regard to products liability, a defendant is liable when the plaintiff proves that the product is defective, regardless of the defendant’s intent. It is irrelevant whether the manufacturer or supplier exercised great care; if there is a defect in the product that causes harm, he or she will be liable for it.

Yet appraisers get to CYA with intended user clauses and with no regard to how their "product" affects others.

You do sound like a lawyer. The facts are on appraiser side.
However if you go before a jury, you might have a small chance in winning the case as a precedent.

 

[Huds_Harm]

As an appraiser, I've never viewed it that way. The requirements set by the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), including the crucial intended user clauses, are part of our professional standards. These clauses aren't about dodging responsibility; they're about clarifying who the appraisal is for and how it should be used.

The goal is to ensure appraisals are accurate and reliable, and these protections help define the scope of our work. They're there to ensure we can do our jobs without being unfairly blamed for issues outside our control as long as we follow the rules and do our work diligently.

While your perspective is understandable, highlighting concerns about consumer protection and accountability, it's essential to recognize that the USPAP standards are there to strike a balance. They help us provide unbiased and accurate valuations while protecting us from unfounded liability claims. So, these standards ensure accountability and provide necessary protections for appraisers.

And it is used to escape accountability.

 

[Fernando]

And it is used to escape accountability.

Blame it on USPAP with intended user.

 

[jay trotta]

Three months later, the borrower began experiencing plumbing issues and learned the well and septic system needed to be completely replaced

So, as of the "Effective Date" everything was functional according to what you have said, so far and everyone involved in the transaction did their job (inspections, due diligence etc) so what was the "cause" of the malfunction??

 

[Raven59]

I understand your perspective. I've been in situations where the supposed escape clause had little significance. The goal is not to evade accountability but to ensure that everyone comprehends the appraisal's specific use and limitations.