• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

NC Judge says NCAB Investigators not subject to USPAP

Status
Not open for further replies.

USPAP Compliant

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
North Carolina
Just so no one puts words in my mouth...a little disclaimer on my part.

The NCAB has long mainteained that their investigators are not subject to USPAP as they are doing investigations rather than reviews. The line between review and investigation is often crossed back and forth. I have suggested on many ocassions, in many locations and in many formats that Standard 3 Reviews SHOULD be done if the any of the three parties involved in a complaint ask for it or want it. That would be the NCAB, the accused or the accuser. I do not think a Standard 3 Review is needed for every complaint filed. I also think that when a Standard 3 Review IS DONE by the state it should be in written form and subject to USPAP and the investigator having full liability for the contents.

Now, it does not matter one whit what I think nor does anyone care what I think...I am just one appraiser in a sea of many.

The NC Apprraiser Act (Chapter 93E of the General Statutes of NC)
has a couple of things that allow these investigators to NOT be subject to USPAP. First, the state's definition of "appraisal" hinges on it being "performed for compensation or other just valuable consideration".
An emploee of a government agency fails to meet this test. Secondly, the state's definition of a real estate appraiser or appraiser "means a person who for a fee or valuable consideration develops and commuincates.......an opinion of value............" Again, the investigator is not getting a fee.

It does not matter if I agree or disagree, like or dislike these definitions....they are state law. I think state investigators who are licensed appraisers SHOULD fall under USPAP and that will take a change in the law.

Now for the story:

Way back in May of 2000, appraiser Daniel Hennigan of NC was given a two year suspension for various violations of appraisal rules and laws. He appealed the decision to Superior court and kept on appraising while wating for the case to be heard.

The case was finally heard on September 9, 2002 (over two years later)
in Mecklenburg County Superior court.

The appeal of the decision had THREE main points:

1) That the NCAB had violated his rights by not requiring the investigators to perform a Standard 3 Review.

2) That the NCAB had violated due process by considering a PREVIOUS CONSENT ORDER signed by the defendent when they decided how severe his punishment should be. (The defendent had admitted to violations of Standards Rules 1 and 2 in a previous complaint in 1998) .

3) That the two year suspension was too harsh and was "arbitrary and capricious".


To make a long story short, the Superior Court Judge found in favor of the NCAB and aginst the defendent on all three issues. The supension was activated and will be served.


I suspect this case will be set a precedent for the future. I sincerely hope the NCAB will do the right thing (or what I consider the right thing) and have the investigators do Standard 3 Reviews when any of the 3 or more parties in a complaint want one. To me, that seems fair and reasonable.
Sometimes doing what is legal may not extend to doing what is right.
This is one of those situations.
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Professional Status
General Public
State
North Carolina
Bob and others

I understand the Judges decision. The arguments made are all that the NCAB has made time and time again.

The judge was misled by the NCAB on these issues. He got one right in the Harigan case. The one he got right was that the investigators did not offer an opinion of value.

What the investigators offered was a really poor criticism of the Harrigan work product. It turns out after all the dust settled that the investigators were just as clueless as was Harrigan regarding the critical issue in the case; the actual type of ownership in the proeprty (ie, townhouse, condominium or the hybrid description townhouse condominium). During the hearing, the non appraiser on the board got it right after about 5 hours of confusing testimony. Harrigan deserved whatever he got, it was incompetent work. He failed to identify the property type correctly, he just accepted whatever his client told him it was.

Back to the issue at hand. The argument that the investigators do not get paid is just ludicrous. They get paid and paid healthily for their work. They do not need to be paid in addition to their compensation for doing an appraisal, and appraisal review. By definition in USPAP, they are being paid as part of their employment.

Roberta and the legal beagles know that this is not a good decision. First, it has not been appealled to an appelate level, therefore is not really good law. Proof you ask, look at my case. The NCAB would not have had their deputy investigator testify on the basis of a Standard Three review if it was good law. He did not develop an opinion of value, nevertheless they had him accomplish this work product as a Standard Three review. Why, because they did not want me to challenge them on this issue in my case as it makes it way through the appeals process. They know I am right about this issue.

Bob, I know you believe that it is at best an unethical dodge on their part to not have their investigators do Standard Three reviews on all cases. Even when they do Standard three reviews, their work is atrocious. To do what Humphries did took all of about five hours, including four hours of travel time, The report and his testimony reveal that he had no basis for his stated conclusions. The report is also silent on the many assumptions, hypothetical conditions and extraordinary assumptions he made regarding the subject property and my work product. Unsupported conclusions one and all, and all of them wrong. Look at the difference between his review and David Johnsons and the quality of the work product is apparent.

If you believe that investigators be held accountable, why do you not turn in Humphries? You know why I can not.

I am absolutely disgusted that so many well meaning appraisers continue to be led by the nose by the NCAB and Roberta's mistruths. The reason she wishes the rules to be treated loosey goosey regarding the investiogators is so that the investigators can act as advocates for the prosectution. As a USPAP instructor you know the primary difference between one working outside the label of appraiser and an appraiser is whether the individual is acting in an advocy role or not.

Look at my case. The other staff inverstigator, also an appraiser, testified as an investigator. He stuck just to facts, he offered no opinions. Howver, his investigation was totally directed by the prosecutor. At the direction of the prosecutor he was told not to discuss with me any of the issues, he did not speak to my client, Why, because Roberta told him "there is nothing to be gained " She did not want the investigator to have knowledge that would prejudice my case, she did not want the investigator to report that my client, an attorney who has read many hundreds of appraisals and used appraisers on a continuing basis as part of his work, was satisfied with my analysis and the report.

Even Humphries "chose" not to discuss any issues with me, or my client. Yet he spoke with everybody else involved in the case. Further he met in two prosecutorial planning sessions with Roberta, prior to developing his report. Tell me that you think this is ethical? It is perfectly legal, but ethically it is jsut wrong and you must know it.

This is crass advocacy, and that knowledgeable and informed individuals, indeed USPAP instructors, even suggest that it is appropriate for a paid appraiser to offer opinions about the quality of someones elses work, even without making value conclusions, try to circumvent appropriate professional decorum of advocy, competency and objectivity issues is just abhorent to me and quite frankly beyond belief.

One of the reasons I am going sailing rather than continuing in this profession is that there are so many appraisers, who although they are otherwise are good, knowledgeable and well meaning appraisers, are just so anxious to get rid those they percieve as bad appraisers (who are cutting into their business) that they will ignore bad ethics on the part of appraisal boards. After five years of having these discussions, I am frankly tired of having the burden of constantly being subtly accused of being misguided on these issues.

The ball is in the hands of others who now know the facts. Despite the efforts of the NCAB and other to stop the appointments of those who will request law changes and board practices that are unethical, these appointments will be made in the near future. Roberta, Mel Black, and the others on the board and board staff who act unethically will be removed.

Best Regards

Tom Hildebrandt GAA
 

USPAP Compliant

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
North Carolina
Tom,

I got two emails this week from members of the NC House of Representatives offering to meet with me to discuss appraisal issues. This is the result of well over 100 emails I have sent them.

I hope to meet with one or both of them real soon. It will take a lot more appraisers getting to some of these lawmakers to change anything. Facts seem to work better than emotion and opinions. This means I have to exercise some restraint which is a hard thing for me to do.

It is encouraging to know that some of them are at least reading some of the emails. These two have read both Petitions, all the Vance County newspaper articles and some emails on issues in my county concerning foreclosures and fraud.

Perhaps some changes and improvements are on the horizon.
 

George Hatch

Elite Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
California
Bob,

I looked into the North Carolina Laws and Regs a few months back and learned a few things:

"When used in this Chapter, unless the context otherwise requires, the term:

(11) "Real estate appraiser" or "appraiser means a person who for a fee or valuable consideration develops and communicates real estate appraisals or otherwise gives an opinion of value of real estate or any interest therein.
(emphasis added)

Perhaps the judge is distracted by the clause "for a fee or other valuable consideration" and thinks appraisers only work under fee arrangements. What about salaried employees, like bank appraisers, appraisers working for one of the federal regulatory agencies as defined in FIRREA, or appraisers working as investigators for the state? Are all of these individuals exempt from adhering to the above state law simply because they work for a salary rather than a fee? Notice the law makes no distinction nor is it conditioned based on different purposes of the assignment. In other words, the NCAB is neither expressly nor implicitly exempted from the above definition simply because they are conducting their activities for reasons other than assisting in the underwriting of a loan or establishing a value for an estate.

From a USPAP standpoint, it matters not what nomenclature is used for an activity if that activity is defined in the Definitions Section of the USPAP. An appraiser cannot claim exemption from USPAP when they are offering a 'valuation' if that activity otherwise falls under the definition of "Appraisal"; the standards for appraisal contained in the USPAP will still apply. Likewise, the NCAB cannot claim expemption from the USPAP simply because their appraisal review (wherein their licensed appraiser/investigator comments on the quality of part or all of another appraiser's work product) is called an 'investigation'. USPAP still applies regardless of what you call the activity.


OTHER LAWS AND REGS
G.S. 93E-1-4 has separate definitions for appraiser and the various level of licensure and certification within the state of North Carolina. The North Carolina definition for "Appraiser" does not make specific references to either Appraisal Review or Appraisal Consulting activities as are included in the USPAP, but also has no sepatate category of licensing over these activities, even though NCABS 57A.0501 specifically includes USPAP SR-3 into state law.

Since North Carolina appraisal regulations require compliance with the USPAP, it can be argued that licensed appraisers have, by choice, accepted the requirements to comply with the USPAP as a condition for holding their appraisal licenses. Since USPAP applies to appraisers when they are engaged in appraisal, appraisal review, and appraisal consulting, and since the NC laws applies to appraisers but do not specifically address appraisal review or appraisal consulting functions, the same rules for appraisers apply whether they are engaged specifically in appraisals, appraisal review, or appraisal consulting activities; again, regardless of the nomenclature used.

The USPAP definition for "Appraisal Practice" includes activities that concurrently encompass appraisal, appraisal review, and appraisal consulting and comment that a given assignment may include elements of all three.

NC 93E-1-4 includes definitions for "Appraisal" and "Appraisal Assignment" that are similar to the USPAP definitions, but do not inlcude definitions for appraisal review or appraisal consulting. Since North Carolina laws govern appraisal review assignments but do not specifically address them, and since NC 57A.0501 incorporates the USPAP, including SR-3, the USPAP definitions are requirements are left as the only enforceable standard of practice for those functions by a state licensed appraiser in North Carolina. There is no reference in North Carolina appraisal law to any different standards of appraisal practice, including appraisal, appraisal reviews or appraisal consulting activities. This being the case, if the NCAB argues that those activities are not regulated in their state, does that mean that all appraisers engaged in those activities are free to do as they wish without regard either for the USPAP or for the NCAB and the appraisal laws of the state of North Carolina?

G.S 93E-1-5 describes the make up of the appraisal board, including how they are appointed as well as some qualifications, requirements, and restrictions. Out of 7 board memebrs, 6 will be state licensed or state certified appraisers with not less than 5 years experience. (I believe this number has recently been changed or is currently in the process of being changed with the addition of a couple more seats on the board).

When considering the incorporation of the USPAP into North Carolina's appraisal laws and regulations as well as other NC law references specifically regarding appraisals and appraisal assignments, the 6 board members who are state licensed or state certified appraisal are required by law to comply with USPAP when performing activities that fall under one of the definitions in the USPAP. Although not specifically addressed in NC appraisal law, if the state appraisal board investigators are also state licensed or state certified appraisers, their conduct in activities that are defined in the USPAP would also be required by state law to comply with the USPAP.

There are no loopholes or exceptions noted in North Carolina law that would exempt state licensed or state certified board members or staff members (investigators, for instance) from compliance with the USPAP when engaged in activities that fall under one of the definitons in the USPAP, specifically, appraisal, appraisal review or appraisal consulting.

Now we come to the Ethics argument. The following comment in the Ethics Rule is a Binding Requirement from which there is no Departure permitted:

Comment: This rule specifies the personal obligations and responsibilities of the individual appraiser. However, it should also be noted that groups and organizations engaged in appraisal practice share the same ethical obligations.
This comment applies to the NCAB as a group.

Comment: An individual appraisal employed by a group or organization that conducts itself in a manner that does not conform to these Standards should take steps that are appropriate under the circumstances to ensure compliance with the standards.
This comment applies to the individual board members and the staff of the NCAB. In the history of the appraisal profession, there are numerous examples of individual appraisers who have been faced with a conflict between their employers' desires and compliance with appraisal standards and ethics. Appraisers faced with these types of conflicts are required to adhere to the USPAP, and many have done so even at the expense of their employment or engagement.


The crux of my line of reasoning is this: I believe the judge has erred based on the north Carolina laws as written and that whatever argument the respondent appraiser or their attorney made failed to clearly point out these items of law. I believe there are grounds for appeal and that if competently argued, the appraiser should prevail as far as the allegations that the state licensed and state certified individuals working for the NCAB and its staff have violated the USPAP and subsequently have also violated the North Carolina laws they are charged to enforce. Just as the State's Attorney General and the District Attorneys must follow the law when prosecuting criminal cases, and judges in civil cases must follow the letter of the law when adjudicating thier cases, so must the NCAB also comply with the laws as they are written. This is not a USPAP argument, but is an argument as to the rule of law. Convicted felons have been set free on a lot less than this.

This is not to suggest that the appraiser is not guilty of whatever violations with which he has been charge; only that it is entirely inappropriate, hypocritical and in this case, even illegal to violate USPAP and the state laws when trying to enforce them. Again, there are no statutes in North Carolina appraisal laws or regulations that exempt them either as an organization or as individuals from complying with the USPAP.

I actually have more to say on this subject, none of which supports the NCAB's position because I believe they are in a very poor position. To repeat, I believe the judge has made an error based on the laws as written, and that if competently appealed, this decision can easily be overturned.


George Hatch - Troublemaker
 

USPAP Compliant

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
North Carolina
George,

I don't disagree. The fact remains that until another court sees it your way or my way or some other way....the COURT makes the call.

In debate class I learned to look at both sides of an issue.....even the side you disagree with.

A county tax assessor does appraisals....do they comply with all of USPAP? No. They are not even required to have a appraiser crtification (other than a test for mass appraisers).

The common term of "fee appriser" is to differentiate between those that charge a specific fee for a specific appraisal and those that have some broad scope of duties. I can see how a judge might determine that an investigator, employee of the state is not getting a "fee".


These issues make the CHARACTER, goals, ethics and sense of fair play become so very important in who gets appointed to these state boards. ALL state license boards. The way we do it now is based on politics, campaign contibutions, PAC influence and political favors. When we appraisers (and contractors, real estate agents, home inspectors and all the other tens of thousands of professional license holders) wake up and demand a better sytem, then and only then will we see more effective professional license boards.

I hope you and others get mad enoung to do something.

Gld to know someone actually took the time to read some of Chapter 93E. My hat is off to you.
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Professional Status
General Public
State
North Carolina
Bob

The efforts of those of us who want to hold the NCAB to the same ethical and legal standards as other appraiser are hurt by the efforts of those, such as yourself, who argue that Standard three reviews are not required by the investigators in all cases.

The choice is not up to the appraiser except to the extent that he choose to hold a license. Once he, or she, holds a license in the state of North Carlolina they must comply with USPAP and the performance requirements of Std 1,2, and 3.

In your discussions with these legislators, whom ever they ay be, you need to tell the them the NCAB is acting illegally and unethically on this issue.

George is saying exactly what I have been saying for five years, and any body who has taken the time to read the law, and observe what the investigators are doing at the behest of the NCAB, must come to the same logical conclusion. Any knowledgerable person who argues otherwise is essentially arguing expediency over ethics. This is bad for our profession.

The fact is that this board and its attorneys contnue to argue a position that is counter to the law and what our ethical standards require; this should be cause for all thoughtful and competent appraisers to wonder, will this board turn its attention to me and find some pretext for charging me with a violation? Becasue under our current system, you can not win if the investigator disagrees wiith an adjustment. They do not have to prove anything, and most often can not, yet you are guilty. You are guilty.

Best Regards

Tom Hildebrandt GAA
 

George Hatch

Elite Member
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
State
California
Bob,

I don't reckon you and I actually disagree on anything of significance. Well, maybe the one thing (SR-3 reviews only when one of the parties requests it). Personally, I think that if USPAP applies to an activity then that activity should be performed according to standards all the time.

There are three practical reasons for this besides the obvious fairness issue. Reason No. 1 is that if the state board pursues due diligence all of the time, they won't have to second guess which cases require the little 'extra' work and which ones don't. This saves them from having to go back later after the respondent complains about due process and essentially retrofit their investigation. You may interpret that as in, covering their tracks. If anything, it's cheaper in the long run to do it right the first time all the time. Honestly, how hard would it be and how much more would it cost for these guys to do their jobs properly all the time? How many losses from lack of due process can a board consider to be acceptable?

Reason No. 2 is that the state board, just like every other appraiser out there, deals primarily in the currency of integrity. Once their integrity is called into question then what good are they? If their standard M.O. consists of cutting corners most of the time, then how can we trust that they ever do what they're supposed to do?

Reason No. 3 is related to No. 2 but is even more basic than that; leadership by example. How does a state board that operates on an expediency basis 80% of the time have the moral authority to hold appraisers accountable for their actions 100% of the time?

I can see your point that having SR-3 reviews available on demand is a far better option than not having them at all, and I would definitely vote for that of those were my only two choices. But I also think there is too much at stake in these investigations for the state boards to pick and choose which ones they'll run by the book. Let us not forget that people's careers are on the line here.

The example you cite of the county tax assessors not following USPAP is probably not a good example for several reasons. One of those reasons is that some of the assessors do follow USPAP for those portions of their job that are so defined. Another reason is that some of them follow a similar code of conduct, defined in the law or as a documented procedure manual. Lastly, the USPAP still applies to those activities, whether the individuals are required by law to observe it or not.

I will agree that this decision will stand unless and until another, higher court agrees with the mainstream of appraisers about the applicability of the USPAP to some of the enforcement activities of the state appraisal board. I interpret this loss as a failure to competently argue the issue of how the laws are actually written, rather than as a failure of the USPAP to stand up to judicial review. If I knew how to contact the appraiser you were referring to, I'd be happy to provide him and his attorney with sufficient information and analysis to support that portion of their appeal. Again, not to comment on their innocence or guilt, but merely as an advocate for due process and the relevance of the USPAP to our profession. Sooner or later one of these judges (besides the AL Judge in Tom's case) is going to actually read the law and the USPAP and try to understand what they're saying and why it's important. When that happens, these wayward boards will either have to get some loopholes passed into the law so they can hide behind them, or else get on the same train as the rest of us. Either way would be better than the hypocrisy we have going right now.


I figure the resolution to this is truly just a matter of time.


George Hatch
 

USPAP Compliant

Elite Member
Joined
Jan 15, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
North Carolina
I am in favor of a change in the language of the law to explicitly, by name and by statute to cover state appraisal board investigators.

Until that happens or some body with jurisdiction and authority decides to take a clear stand on this issue it will not be "illeagal" or "legal" for a state board to use Standard 3 in their investigation process. Where are the AF, the AI, the Appraisal Section, NAIFA and other bodies on this issue? Who has come out and addressed this issue? Which of these or other groups have gone to the state legislatures and asked for some clear language on the issue?

That is why I am in favor of the participant option....only until there is something better and more concrete.

The Appraisal Foundation has been unwilling to take a stand on this issue. With the wind blowing toward a uniform licence law in all states, it seems likely such a provision may turn up in the near future.

Anyone of us can say what we like and interpret how we like. The bottom line is when there is a question, a judge will decide if something is illeagal or not.

Many of the states don't even employ appraisers on their appraisal board investigation staffs. I have been told at some meetings that some states use state troopers for investigations. Others use the same investigators that investigate for the barber, beautician and pest control boards. Some states farm out investigations to fee appraisers across the state. There is no state to state consistency.

Until there is a LAW that says "all investigations of appraiser misconduct must be performed by certified appraisers and conform to USPAP" this issue will not be resolved. I am in favor of such a law. Until such a law comes along I will continue to to ask that any appraiser that wants and asks for a Standard 3 Review will get one. If they ask for A S 3 R and are denied one, it seems THAT would make a good basis for appeal.

My point in the original post was not to say the judge was right or wrong but to demonstrate that again the issue is open to interpretation.

Another issue that comes up time and time again is the "correct" punishment for an offense. In this case the JUDGE said that "It is well within the discretion of the Appraisal Board to determine the appropriate disciplinary sanction to be imposed on the Petitioner." I am not real happy with that either. I am in favor of less discretion and more specific guidleines for specific offenses. A chart that says if you do THIS your discipline will fall between a certain range of disciplinr on the chart.
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2002
Professional Status
General Public
State
North Carolina
Bob

You ask where the AF, the AI, the NAR, NAIFA and other bodies on this issue?

Only two organizations have an expressed opinion. The ASB says in a F&Q, that absent law specifically preventing an appraiser from doing an Standard Three, if he is asked to comment on anothers work product in the course of an investigation, that work product should comply with USPAP. This F&Q was generated by discussion on this forum about this very issue two years ago.

The NCAR supports standard three reviews. The NCAB tried to pass legislation exempting their investigators. The NAR Appraisal Section got the law squelched. The NCAR Appraisal section and the ASA both supported my petition for Standard Three review. No other agency or professional body spoke on the issue. Several folks, yourself included, waffled on the requirement and suggested that investigators and the staff only needed to do them when forced. Many of the old guard appraisers, including the new deputy director said that " you do not need to do a Standard three review to say a report is bad" .

So far as I know, there are no specific formal positions by any national organizations. But I know the AI, the ASB and the ASC are all concerned about rogue boards (and their supporters) who put this sort of "we can chose to opt out of USPAP because it is expedient" attitude. The total disdain for USPAP this kind of attitude presents is why we will go to a federal licensing and regulation of our industry.

I understand there is no consistency among states. And I think that having appraisers as investigators is a good think, so long as they do their work competently with impartiality, ie, as appraisers.

There is no inconsistency in the NC law. The only reason that the board is not doing there work in accordance with standards is because the board ignores the boards own rules on this issue (as they do in many other issues) and the appraisers in the state allow it. I put the issue to the board and the board rejected the idea as too costly. The appraisers speaking to the board were about half and half, with the opposing half including folks like yourself who said it was ok to not do them some of the time. The board naturally took this as a vote in favor of their position for expediency.

Glad to see you now support a law to make this issue more clear. Make that suggestion to your legislatures, The NCAR Appraisal Section will support such a change. That will be the first thing that will happen once the composition of the board membership changes over the next year; the members supported by the NCAR all want the unethical and illegal actions of the NCAB stopped, and they will be doing it by replacing incompetent board members.

Regards

Tom Hildebrandt GAA
 

Francois K. Gregoire

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Professional Status
Certified Residential Appraiser
State
Florida
The Appraisal Foundation has been unwilling to take a stand on this issue. With the wind blowing toward a uniform licence law in all states, it seems likely such a provision may turn up in the near future.

Bob,

Although, to my knowledge, there has been no 'official' position taken by the Appraisal Foundation on the issue of Standard 3 Reviews in Disciplinary Cases by State Regulatory Boards, I have heard at least one member of the AQB express an opinion in a public forum. The gist of it was "how can State Regulatory Boards expect and enforce compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice if they are unwilling or unable to follow the same standards in their procedures?"

Keep in mind, however, the Appraisal Foundation and its two independent boards are not regulatory agencies. I wonder what effect an opinion expressed by them would have if the AF, ASB or the AQB decided to weigh in. Guess I'll have to stew on that a while.

Another issue that comes up time and time again is the "correct" punishment for an offense. In this case the JUDGE said that "It is well within the discretion of the Appraisal Board to determine the appropriate disciplinary sanction to be imposed on the Petitioner." I am not real happy with that either. I am in favor of less discretion and more specific guidleines for specific offenses. A chart that says if you do THIS your discipline will fall between a certain range of disciplinr on the chart.

Looks like I will have to respectfully disagree with your opinion here. Discretion, properly wielded by a Board, is an important aspect of enforcement of State Licensing and Certification laws. Having been on the other side of the table, it's clear each and every case is unique and subject to individual circumstances. Athough in Florida there is a rule outlining the range of penalties for specific offenses and violations, the range is wide and much discretion is given the FREAB. Rarely is the maximum penalty imposed.

Keep in mind there are Boards mindful of their responsibilities and duties to the public and the profession. Doesn't it make more sense to allow such a board, with knowledge of the local market, customs, situations and realities, to debate and craft an appropriate penalty? This seems to make more sense than assuming one size fits all and every situation can be anticipated by the legislature or rule writers. We've all seen what appears to be lack of logic and common sense in minimum sentences, zero tolerance policies and the like.

Each and every appraisal assignment is different, produces its own challenges and requires individual attention. Each and every alleged violation of the USPAP and State Licensing and Certification laws is different, presents its own challenges, is subject to individual circumstances and demands individual attention. It doesn't seem right to submit or judge complaints by what amounts to a machine. Humans can weigh and judge. We should let them excercise that ability. If their decisions are poorly made or supported, work to replace the humans, just as we replace judges.

Sure, there is room for improvement in some areas, but reducing the imposition of a penalty to consulting a chart may be moving in the other direction for some jurisdictions.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Top

AdBlock Detected

We get it, advertisements are annoying!

Sure, ad-blocking software does a great job at blocking ads, but it also blocks useful features of our website. For the best site experience please disable your AdBlocker.

I've Disabled AdBlock
No Thanks