July 2008 ASC Q&a- Wink Wink Comp Comp

[SANDY]

PE:

Let me spell it out for ya a little. You and many others here that are certified and sanctified have no problem playing your so-called experience card as an absolute justification or proof of the legitimacy for your posts. Then you complain when I play one of my cards as absolute justification for me not having the perfect solution. Well too bad-homey ain't gonna play your game the way you want me to play it. So get over it!

Like I said before some of the grumpy old men/women in this profession don't like it when their tree gets shaken and their long held opinions get challenged even though it's high time it happened.

Now, I am up very early today because I must go to an auction where I hope to be able to make some real money and I don't need no stinkin lenders' money or no just say no appraiser to tell me what it's worth.

Believe me PE, in the long run I do have much respect for those in this profession that must rely on it to make their living-but I just have to wonder---at what point are those folks going to rise up against those fat cats at the top that are responsible for this mess appraisers are in? Darn it--it's your livelihood isn't it? I am in it because I can throw some punches without fear of retribution and most folks that need their job can't.
Maybe you can now understand a little bit- I am here to say what others cannot.

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

Please, let's tone down the personal comments to each other and work on the topic of this thread. Original Post is about the July USPAP Q&A.

*************************************************

IMHO:

As Mike Kennedy posted earlier the members of the Appraisal Foundation Advisory Committee puts us at 17 Appraisers Organizations vs 58 lender and/or government related members making it appraisers with 29% vs 'them' with 71% of the power there, the decks there really are stacked against appraisers. Having the ASC as a 'participating observer' makes it even worse when you look at it's members.

My plea to TAF and ASC:

PLEASE don't 'help' appraisers any more! You're killing us!

 

[Hamlet]

PE:

Let me spell it out for ya a little. You and many others here that are certified and sanctified have no problem playing your so-called experience card as an absolute justification or proof of the legitimacy for your posts. Then you complain when I play one of my cards as absolute justification for me not having the perfect solution. Well too bad-homey ain't gonna play your game the way you want me to play it. So get over it!

Like I said before some of the grumpy old men/women in this profession don't like it when their tree gets shaken and their long held opinions get challenged even though it's high time it happened.

Now, I am up very early today because I must go to an auction where I hope to be able to make some real money and I don't need no stinkin lenders' money or no just say no appraiser to tell me what it's worth.

Believe me PE, in the long run I do have much respect for those in this profession that must rely on it to make their living-but I just have to wonder---at what point are those folks going to rise up against those fat cats at the top that are responsible for this mess appraisers are in? Darn it--it's your livelihood isn't it? I am in it because I can throw some punches without fear of retribution and most folks that need their job can't.
Maybe you can now understand a little bit- I am here to say what others cannot.

Sandy, I believe you are the one accusing others of not having the perfect solution.

Rather than contribute to the discussion, you are busy insulting and accusing others who have made this their profession, while you apparently just want to dabble.

If you really want to throw some effective punches, why are you not writing to your government representatives and the people at TAF and ASB?

I was taught that if you don't offer a solution, you are just part of the problem.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

-NEUTRAL-

Outside of residential mortgage work, there are plenty of cirumstances were a little preliminary research is done to determine whether a more money should be invested in attempting to do some kind of project - like a feasibility test.

That's what a comp check really is. They get a cheap (ie free in most cases) appraisal to see if it is worth committing more resources, time and effort (including getting a more expensive appraisal).:Eyecrazy:

If you can figure out how to change USPAP and get rid of them (and somehow get everyone to follow the rule), go for it. But you can't screw things up for others.

If the shoe fits - wear it proudly. Pro-Comp. Semantic Exercise "like a feasibility test" - HOGWASH.

IT IS WHAT IT IS. THE "more expensive appraisal" IS CONDITIONAL upon the " little preliminary test".:Eyecrazy:


Steven - say it ain't so.

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

Those that are not licensed as an appraiser can do whatever valuation services they want - in most States and areas.

 

[Bill_FL]

If the shoe fits - wear it proudly. Pro-Comp. Semantic Exercise "like a feasibility test" - HOGWASH.

IT IS WHAT IT IS. THE "more expensive appraisal" IS CONDITIONAL upon the " little preliminary test".:Eyecrazy:


Steven - say it ain't so.

Mike - this is where your absolutes are not correct. The second appraisal is not ordered with a "gauranteed value" or contigency. It was ordered because the premlinary research indicated it was worth the lende/borrower's investment to proceed with a commitment of more money for an appraisal to be used for financing.

The contigency problem would only be an issue if the second appraisal order says something like: "Go ahead with the appraisal, only if it is at least $zzz or more." Not all lenders are bad Mike. Just like not all appraisers are bad. Please stop trying to force you one very narrow view of appraisal practice on the entire population of appraisers.

The way you are going about this, I am suprised you havent called for a complete elimination of the automobile. After all, there are some bad drivers out there who cause injury and death to others. Using your logic, all cars must be bad.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Mike - this is where your absolutes are not correct. The second appraisal is not ordered with a "gauranteed value" or contigency. It was ordered because the premlinary research indicated it was worth the lende/borrower's investment to proceed with a commitment of more money for an appraisal to be used for financing.

The contigency problem would only be an issue if the second appraisal order says something like: "Go ahead with the appraisal, only if it is at least $zzz or more." Not all lenders are bad Mike. Just like not all appraisers are bad. Please stop trying to force you one very narrow view of appraisal practice on the entire population of appraisers.

The way you are going about this, I am suprised you havent called for a complete elimination of the automobile. After all, there are some bad drivers out there who cause injury and death to others. Using your logic, all cars must be bad.

"That's what a comp check really is. They get a cheap (ie free in most cases) appraisal to see if it is worth committing more resources, time and effort (including getting a more expensive appraisal)." :Eyecrazy:


An appraiser must perform assignments with impartiality, objectivity, and independence, and without accommodation of personal interests.

An appraiser must not advocate the cause or interest of any party or issue.

An appraiser must not accept an assignment that includes the reporting of predetermined opinions and conclusions.


BIAS: a preference or inclination that precludes an appraiser’s impartiality, independence, or objectivity in an assignment.

CONTINGENT: dependent on or conditioned by something else

Circle the Wagons time boys.......rally round the flag?

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

Bottom line:

The ONLY cure is to take the appraiser selection and ordering completely away from ANYBODY or ANY COMPANY that is involved in the transaction that would include a mortgage loan.

Yes, I mean both residential and commercial.

 

[DTB]

Mike - this is where your absolutes are not correct. The second appraisal is not ordered with a "gauranteed value" or contigency. It was ordered because the premlinary research indicated it was worth the lende/borrower's investment to proceed with a commitment of more money for an appraisal to be used for financing.

The contigency problem would only be an issue if the second appraisal order says something like: "Go ahead with the appraisal, only if it is at least $zzz or more." Not all lenders are bad Mike. Just like not all appraisers are bad. Please stop trying to force you one very narrow view of appraisal practice on the entire population of appraisers.

.

A wink is as good as a nod to a blind man. Some things don't need to be said to be communicated.

 

[The Warrior Monk]

I've already posted one example in this thread of a service that would fall under what the Q&A is referring to, and may involve a subsequent mortgage down the line.

The number of buyers/sellers that are requesting appraisals be done before buying/selling a property has increased. The possibility exists that the appraiser could also perform an appraisal for a lender down the line.

Another one I occasionally come across is an attorney needs to determine the value of a property before advising a client on a course of action; e.g., gift property, place it in a trust, or sell.

Many might consider these "comp checks," but they are legitimate services that can be provided to a client.