More On Free Comp Checks

[PropertyEconomics]

He is convinced that his little skippy method of weasling around the definition of an appraisal is accurate, so he is never going to change his mind. Anyone with a brain reading this can understand how silly it is. Unless, of course, they are looking to find a way around the system and will take anything they can grab onto as an excuse to continue to skip along. Gotta love appraizul land. What a fabulous place.

Stone ... at some point I would guess a board somewhere will change his mind for him. Parsing words and dancing with toad wort in your pockets under a full moon will not protect one forever. At some point one of those appraisals that werent appraisals will come up to bite his arse ... even "good clients" turn on you from time to time. Then he will be "chanting" a different tune.

 

[fifteen]

One more time for the reading comprehension challenged. The definition of an appraisal by USPAP states a primary definition. The elaborations following the primary definition are examples of the primary definition and do not stand alone without the primary definition. It's really not that hard to understand, unless your head is made of stone. I just can't believe that you guys are that thick. And you defend your position with insults - such mature and intelligent responses. The lie is stating they do stand alone - which if you stood back and looked at logically, makes no sense at all. Remember, if you're throwing dirt you're losing ground and, old dogs can learn new tricks. Just because what you learned was wrong doesn't mean you can't re-learn the true definition without foaming at the mouth.

 

[CANative]

I disagree with Ken B and think he might be misusing the AI's little circle within a circle within a circle diagram explaining Appraisal service, appraisal practice and appraisal.

My point is that compliance with USPAP is required when either the service or the appraiser is obligated by law or requlation or by agreement to comply.

The purpose of the appraisal regulations in CA's BPC is compliance with FIRREA and pertains to federally related appraisal activity.

My personal opinion of comp checks is that it is poor appraisal practice and digusting. It dilutes the credibility of all appraisers and undermines the public trust in appraisal practice and this is antithetical to the purpose of USPAP as stated in the preamble.

 

[Offshore]

This isn’t a search for the holy grail of USPAP, it’s a futile quest for absolution from one’s peers which is an impossible task considering in this example it must come from within.

 

[PropertyEconomics]

I disagree with Ken B and think he might be misusing the AI's little circle within a circle within a circle diagram explaining Appraisal service, appraisal practice and appraisal.

My point is that compliance with USPAP is required when either the service or the appraiser is obligated by law or requlation or by agreement to comply.

The purpose of the appraisal regulations in CA's BPC is compliance with FIRREA and pertains to federally related appraisal activity.

My personal opinion of comp checks is that it is poor appraisal practice and digusting. It dilutes the credibility of all appraisers and undermines the public trust in appraisal practice and this is antithetical to the purpose of USPAP as stated in the preamble.

Greg ... comp checks only dilute the credibility of appraisers IF the comp check is incredible and not completed in compliance with USPAP. There are many ethical appraisers that offer desk top and restricted use reports that are in full compliance with USPAP and thus are not antithetical to the purpose.
USPAP allows for a very wide range of products within appraisal practice. The real issues are those that complete these assignments in an unethical manner and then hide behind the document and attempt to use it as a shield for their unethical behavior.
Those that are unethical are the ones that dilute the credibility of all appraisers ... not those that continue to be ethical everyday.

Once again we find this issue is much more about the author of the product than the product itself.

 

[CANative]

Cali only has USPAP for federally related transactions. I dont know about your state .. in my state USPAP is LAW .. we must follow it. Now what you do is your own business, but if you were to do a comp check here .. you would have to have a file meeting standards 1 and 2 .. because you have done an appraisal as DEFINED BY LAW .....

I personally think CALI got it wrong ... look at the number of foreclosures there ... it might give you a clue. And there is no personal attack on you or the other guy that thinks comp checks .. Save worthless appraisals .... Im not attacking either of you .. I just believe you are both wrong and I also believe USPAP supports my conclusion. (Along with the other hundreds of posters here who actually do get it)

Comp Checks are appraisals as defined by USPAP ... your post of what the LO asks you is proof that is true ...

You're trying to use USPAP to argue that USPAP must be followed. But if USPAP does not apply (obligated by the service or appraiser or by agreement) then USPAP can't be the source of the requirement, can it?

 

[CANative]

Greg ... comp checks only dilute the credibility of appraisers IF the comp check is incredible and not completed in compliance with USPAP. There are many ethical appraisers that offer desk top and restricted use reports that are in full compliance with USPAP and thus are not antithetical to the purpose.
USPAP allows for a very wide range of products within appraisal practice. The real issues are those that complete these assignments in an unethical manner and then hide behind the document and attempt to use it as a shield for their unethical behavior.
Those that are unethical are the ones that dilute the credibility of all appraisers ... not those that continue to be ethical everyday.

Once again we find this issue is much more about the author of the product than the product itself.

Incorrect (IMO).

USPAP-goosecrap. You're position considers each assignment on it's own merit but that's not the point. Who cares if Standards 1 and 2 are met when the ethics section is sneered at by the appraiser, the client and the intended user.

 

[PropertyEconomics]

One more time for the reading comprehension challenged. The definition of an appraisal by USPAP states a primary definition. The elaborations following the primary definition are examples of the primary definition and do not stand alone without the primary definition. It's really not that hard to understand, unless your head is made of stone. I just can't believe that you guys are that thick. And you defend your position with insults - such mature and intelligent responses. The lie is stating they do stand alone - which if you stood back and looked at logically, makes no sense at all. Remember, if you're throwing dirt you're losing ground and, old dogs can learn new tricks. Just because what you learned was wrong doesn't mean you can't re-learn the true definition without foaming at the mouth.

Apprazur ... they can stand alone .. that is what commas do as follows:

An appraisal must be numerically expressed as a specific amount,

An appraisal must be numerically expressed as a range of numbers,

An appraisal must be numerically expressed as a relationship (e.g., not more than, not less than) to a previous value or numerical benchmark (e.g., assessed value, collateral value)


See they do stand alone ...

In your example, whether you care to believe it or not, when the LO gave you the numerical number of $190,000 and you said that appears doable ... you did in fact numerically express a value against a numerical benchmark, whether you spoke the number or not.
Now you say we cant prove it ... and I say we can ... YOU expressed those words in a prior post, they came from your mind and your fingers ... if you wish to parse at this point that is fine with me ... but its very clear to all here that you have expressed a value against a benchmark, which as you can see above is an appraisal in accordance with USPAP.

 

[PropertyEconomics]

Incorrect (IMO).

USPAP-goosecrap. You're position considers each assignment on it's own merit but that's not the point. Who cares if Standards 1 and 2 are met when the ethics section is sneered at by both the client and the intended user.

Sneered at? .... intersting since the client and the intended user are the ones ordering these "appraisals". I think you will find that my statements are not "incorrect" they simply do not agree with yours. You can say USPAP is goosecrap if you wish ... IMO that is what is wrong with our profession. Appraisers want the document to say something it simply doesnt say ... dont like comp checks dont do them .. like comp checks do them properly. USPAP is clear on the issue, they are appraisals and part of a product service that appraisers can offer their clients.

In the end appraisers measure their own ethics and compliance with USPAP until someone turns someone in and a jury of ones peers determines compliance.

 

[fifteen]

An appraisal must be numerically expressed as :

1) a specific amount
2) as a range of numbers
3) [FONT=Times New Roman,Times New Roman]as a relationship (e.g., not more than, not less than) to a previous value opinion [/FONT]or numerical benchmark (e.g., assessed value, collateral value).

There, does that help? How many of you can get this. An appraisal must be numerically expressed by:

1) An appraiser
2) A bank
3) Clerk at the grocery store
4) The dog next door that talks to you

Another one : Choose 1 to describe a numerical expression that qualifies as an appraisal :

1) Numerical values spoken or written to the appraiser
2) Talking about a benchmark or previous value with no numerical expression by the appraiser of it's current value
3) Whispering a number to yourself
4) Something in writing from the appraiser expressing a numerical value or range of value