• 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.

NCAB verses Tom Hildebrandt - Final order of clueless board

Not open for further replies.
Jan 16, 2002
Professional Status
General Public
North Carolina
Fellow forumites

The order overturning Judge Chess ruling has arrived.

First thing of interest, not a single board member has signed this 25 page document. It was signed out by the Executive Director. I would be willing to bet not a one of them has even seen this order.

The rest of the order is about what I expected. They said that David Johnson is a friend of mine and that he does not like the NCAB, therefore he is biased and his testimony has not merit. Of course the, Deputy director, recnetly hired buy the board, who at the time of the hearing was on temporary hire to see how he would work out and who sat in two prosecutorial planning sessions and testified in two related cases before he prepared his Std 3 review is considered to be beyond reporach even though he had no factual basis for any of his charges.

But on to the meat of the argument, they argue that the fact that the property could be marketed proves there was no blight. This is absolutely insane, blight is the loss in value of a property, not what whether it can be sold or not. My cut on the staffs thoughts on this is that definitions are not important as long as we can make the story sound good.

And the final kicker, I did not state all assumptions and conditions. The board apparently feels that my opinions on this issue of through the fence access were not reasoanble because they were not blight related.
Here is the boards logic, " Mr. Hildebrandt did not have a reasonable basis for his extraordinary assumption that access would be granted by the airport, and since he did not comply with the disclosure requirements set forth in USPAP, his use of the etraordinary assumption did not result in a credible analysis." What the board is saying is we since we disagree with what Mr. Hildebrandt's opinion, we find the report to be lacking, and since the report is lacking, his appraisal must therefore not be not credible.

They then go on to say that since my analysis is not credible, therefore my report is misleading. We have gone full circuit in this logic of the NCAB.

Of course, what I opined was that the airport could grant access, and that absent the condemnation authority of the airport (which led to blight) that such access would almost certainly be permitted, and that buyers would place a premium value on that item.

The board argues, regarding the term misleading in the context of Std 2, that only standard 2-1(B) applies to intended users. They alledge that "...USPAP Std 2-1(a) and 2-1© do not apply to intened users.
Essentially, they argue that a report that is misleading to any third party is a bad report, other than Std 2-1(B).

Buck up my fellow appriasers, if this board gets a hold of one of your reports, and they are so inclined for whatever reason to take you to task, you can be accused of a misleading reports, it is misleading becuase they say it is. It does not matter what your client or the intended users have to say or your peers have to say, you are guilty. They are just gaffing off Statement 9 in its entirety.

Absolute double talk, but that is what Roberta and her crowd do best, confuse the facts with double talk and false trails.

At any rate, I have now got to take the rest of the afternoon to put together the basic outline for my attorney to prepare the appeal.

Regards to all

Tom Hildebrandt GAA

Farm Gal

Elite Member
Jan 14, 2002
Professional Status
Licensed Appraiser
Good GOD, will this never END?

Tom, my heart goes out to you, and strong wishes for your continued strength under this adversity.

Tilting at windmills gets pretty old, particularly when someone else in authority agrees that the damn thing is (or ought to be) seriously diseased or dead. :evil: .

There does come a time to give up and give in, but as long as you have the strength to keep on keeping on I will throw mental energy at the issue, write letter and raise hell :x ... This persecution does appear to me to be W_R_O_N_G! :evil:

I DO believe that your case is getting some of the attention needed to cause change to occur. s l - o -- w change.

Bless you for standing up and saying this is not right!


Elite Member
Jan 16, 2002
Professional Status
Certified General Appraiser
The word credible means: "Capable of being believed, plausible; worthy of confidence; reliable." As I recall your accuser's appraisal was $20,000 per acre, your appraisal was at $80,0000 per acre, and the court tended toward your view and ruled $60,000 as just compensation. In light of this, whose appraisal has credibility and whose lacks credibility.

PS: I finally heard the NCAB say something that I can't argue with: "David Johnson is opinionated." :lol:
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

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