Mark your calenders. Oct 5, 2007 10:30 am

[JoTetherow]

Hi all. Have ya missed me?

I am mostly recovered from my cold now and I am ready to get back on track with our concerns.

we are about a month away from the next board meeting. Mike and I have chatted about how we want to present ourselves and we thought that if each of us came "armed" with a question, one near and dear to our hearts that we may be able to get a response or SOMETHING from the board.

David, your biggest concern seems to be the substandard schooling in your area. perhaps you can come up with a question for the board on that subject.

here is my question:

In light of the new regulations that go in effect 1/1/08 concerning supervisors and their rainees, what options are the board considering enacting to track the supervisor and trainee for compliance? follow up question if they do not answer satisfactorily, have you considered asking DOLS if they can set up something similar to the broker/sales person registry that RE sales people have? and if they say it is very very hard because you have to do the politics thing, question would be to ernest... Is that correct? (in this case I believe it is not)

there is my question, what question are you going to ask the board?

Jo

 

[KenRossman]

Glad to hear you are feeling better...

I am just finishing up a week of computer hell culminating in a re-format of my hard drive and a 24 hour marathon restoring outlook.

Since you are already all over my favorite pet peeve, how about what consideration is being given to add an experience requirement of say five years minimum before allowing a certified appraiser to be a supervisory?

 

[JoTetherow]

sounds good

, how about what consideration is being given to add an experience requirement of say five years minimum before allowing a certified appraiser to be a supervisory?

sounds good. is that the question you want to ask at the board meeting?

 

[JoTetherow]

cut and pasted

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Kennedy
Publishing revocations & suspensions and the REASONS - will spread the word - they are finally Enforcing NYS Appraisal Law and Encourage increased reporting, especially by Review Appraisers. Copies of same should be sent directly by the DOLS to Every Chief Compliance Officer at EVERY NYS domiciled bank for starters, then EVERY Federally Insured Lender. Newsletter SHOULD include a DIRECT REPORTING email addy with reminders to Recipients on BOTH ends of the spectrum that their LICENSE to operate in NY includes upholding the public trust. I've never received any ENCOURAGEMENT from the State has anyone else?

Mike, you may have a pleasant surprise in the next newsletter. The cases that go to court are published in about 30 days on the web, the "minor" cases are in the newsletter which i agree, should be published more often. perhaps a question someone might like to "own" would be "is there any way that the cases with fines/courses that do not go on the web be published or announced more frequently? " adding "it would go a long way in proving to the industry that enforcement is going on. too many people think that there is no enforcement"

for Jo - that's my first question for the Board. Why isn't the State aggressively marketing Enforcement links and encouragement to report Fraud to licensees on the End User and the Appraiser side of the "phone"? Awareness that the State WILL act efficiently and expeditiously on VALID fraud and incompetency violations of NYS Appraisal Law will encourage Reporting and "Clean-sweep".

again, you may be pleasantly surprised when the next newsletter is published. i believe the ASC is notified of the court cases after judgement and before they are published on the web. notifying the end user...i dont know if that is wise or doable. the "minor" complaints can be pretty minor. would you want lenders informed and then put you on a DNU list because you took the 15 hour USPAP instead of the 7 hour by mistake/misundertanding? i am pretty sure that DOLS takes the stand that if one got published to the end user, all would be published. no favoritism.

mike, im going to cut/paste this in the other "question" thread

Jo

 

[KenRossman]

sounds good. is that the question you want to ask at the board meeting?

Can I ask it by phone call in?

 

[JoTetherow]

dont think so.

Can I ask it by phone call in?

that would be great if they had a webinar but it is only webcast.

hahah but that would be another question...

"now that the board meetings are being webcast, is there any way for appraisers to call in during the meeting to ask questions?"

now, let me guess what their response to that would be....

follow up question "why not?"

next follow up question "well, how about moving the meetings to different areas of the state to make the meeting more assessable to NY appraisers?"

 

[Mike Kennedy]

the 15 hour USPAP instead of the 7 hour by mistake/misundertanding?

beginning to look a lot like Christmas............

Jo -any idiot who has a license who "misunderstood" the difference between the 15 and 7 hour USPAP courses..............SHOULD lose their license for sheer stupidity.

I recommended REVOCATIONS......and the reasons.......exactly the same way other states do.

 

[JoTetherow]

everybody stand back.

the 15 hour USPAP instead of the 7 hour by mistake/misundertanding?

beginning to look a lot like Christmas............

Jo -any idiot who has a license who "misunderstood" the difference between the 15 and 7 hour USPAP courses..............SHOULD lose their license for sheer stupidity.

I recommended REVOCATIONS......and the reasons.......exactly the same way other states do.

any idiot....

sorry, Mike, this just makes me laugh. too surreal

this is from the minutes of the last board meeting:

M. Smith said that he believes there is still confusion between the 15-hour and 7-hour USPAP courses, and that many times a licensee believes they can renew by taking only the 15-hour USPAP course. In some cases, licensees have been fined up to $1,000, and M. Smith asked if we can’t allow them to take the 7-hour course within a period of time without instituting a fine. J. DeLollo explained that the 15-hour course is for qualifying education (qe) and the 7-hour course is for continuing education (CE). She also stated that if they take the 15-hour course, they can get CE credit but it will not have satisfied the USPAP requirement to take the 7-hour USPAP course. V. Ledbetter explained that allowing a licensee to take the 15-hour course as part of the CE requirement is explicitly prohibited in the AQB criteria because they have designed two distinct courses. She went on to say that in 2003 and 2004 licensees were allowed to use either course, but as of January 1, 2005 that is no longer allowed. M. Smith again mentioned that many people are confused about this, and doesn’t feel it is fair for them to be fined the same as someone who takes no CE courses. E. Delaney stated that he feels it is fair for everyone to pay a fine, which eliminates the need to “pick and choose” who should be fined and for how much. M. Smith asked how licensees with a medical problem are handled. E. Delaney said they are fined, or given the choice to go to a hearing. J. DeLollo stated that in previous years they would allow extra time to someone who could show a medical hardship. However, effective September 2005 that is no longer allowed by the AQB. V. Ledbetter stated that states are allowed to put someone with a medical hardship into an “inactive” status, and that some states require a payment to get their license back.

PM me for the "rest of the story"

 

[Mike Kennedy]

two distinct courses:Eyecrazy:

well....DUHHHHHHHH

and that discussion most likely took a half hour to 45 minutes better spent on REVOCATION of licenses of those PROVEN to be incompetent and fraudulent.


Beaurocracy at its' finest?

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

OK, I know I'm not in NY and I do apologize for butting in here, but I know from experience that trying to take on any Board by pounding about revoking licenses for every infraction will not get any positive reactions.

Go after the worst first and make it extremely uncomfortable for those that don't yet 'get it'. Many that are already on the edge will drop out of the business anyway with just a fine and additional CE to take.

You all can go after the small stuff after you nail the big fraudsters. Do what you can as you can, but concentrating on taking out the heads first will get you a whole lot further, and much faster than knocking out the minnows with dynamite.