I already said that. The whole purpose of the program is to get more consistent instruction, fewer errors and deviation in the instruction and so on. Which when it comes to appraisers taking that information into their professional practice is exactly what you would want from an instructional perspective - factual accuracy and consistency. Nobody should WANT instructors who do their own thing. Not for this type of course.
The reason for the I don't recall is because I signed that agreement 20 years ago and I haven't reviewed it since. So I can't say for certain that it didn't include some clause that could be construed as an NDA. I reckon "I don't know for sure" is an honest way to answer that question. There are other instructors on this forum - you could try asking one of them if I'm lying.
They should have introduced a PAREA-type oversight national-level instruction superimposed on mentors' shops 20 years ago. No advanced Tech was needed, for it. The main reason for PAREA to be introduced so late in the game was to fast-track more trainees since the AMC fees were too low for appraises to hire trainees . The fact that there the edition content would be good (if it is, IDK ) was an overlay. If they cared about in oversight education, they could have and should have done it long ago
They are so greedy and contemptuous of appraisers ( but I mean FF, the profiteers, the agencies, all of it ) they thought they could bilk everyone forever - well, they will keep trying, but the parasite has devoured the host. As the older appraisers retire or die, they are being replaced by appraisers who, judging from posts, seem clueless about how to apply what they learned to real-world problems. Separating them from the field with hybrids and desktops will make it worse as they will lack sufficient field experience
If anyone had tried, they couldn't have invented a better way to compromise and, in part, obliterate a profession whose role was to provide the one and only licensed professional into a transaction with no interest in the outcome of the transaction. Replacing that personal nonvested role with a computer valuation is not the same thing. There are no brakes anymore on the car, and each inflated computer evaluation will feed the next one.
When this has a historical perspective and is studied later, it will make Enron look like a change. The housing market and home ownership and taxpayer-backed loans are woven into the fabric of our economy. IMO, it is no coincidence that prices have steadily floated into the stratosphere since waivers and value acceptance became more prevalent, especially for purchases.
The AMCs now have a built-in profit stream embedded for them via the appraisal moderation stream of PDC inspections for waivers going to AMCs/ allowing nonlicensed people and the same for hybrids and certain desktop products.
Some appraisers will remain, but the intention of PAREA for the res side could not have come at a worse time, and who would pay for and devote any time whatsoever to train for a dying field designed to send them into bankruptcy if they tend to make available living from it.
The bottom line is that PAREA can't work effectively for a res license when the residential field itself has lost vitality for most to make a viable living from tIt The reality is there is a limited amount of private work to be had for a res license and with the policy decisions that wreaked havoc on the dominant mortgage lending pipeline of work we are where we ended up now.
community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.
