Proposed Changes In The Law

[Tom Hildebrandt]

Steve and Pat

When I started my petition for Standard Three reviews at the NCAB, I had support from several trade organizations (NAR and ASA) but not AI. The official word of the local AI was that there was no consensus, but the unofficial word was that the AI members on the board (2 MAI) and staff (MAI Deputy Director) would watch out for us.

I sent out a letter state wide, 3,800 letters as I recall, at a cost of slightly over $3,000. We had pretty large input to the hearing. Not surprisingly, the younger appraisers, more knowledgeable about USPAP, tended in support of no exemption for investigators. The older designated appraisers tended to be opposed.

Not surprising, the newly appointed deputy Director of theNCAB was opposed to the investigators doing standard three reviews. At that time he was the NC Department of Transportation head appraiser and he said that "We do reviews on all our appraiser reports; therefore we have a lot of experience. ... in my opinion, you do not need to do a formal review in order to determine if there are items that are misleading or items of error that warrant further consideration."

This kind of mentality, that compliance with professional standards is good for others but not for those in positions of authority, is unprofessional, unethical and is the epitomy of arrogance.

Sounds like your Larry Bullock and these other investigators must not provide a substantive basis for their opinions. Otherwise they would not mind preparing their work professionally.

Regards

Tom Hildebrandt GAA

 

[Tom Hildebrandt]

Steve

What about a petition here on the forum stating the basic position that having an appraiser, even in the capacity of an investigator, commenting on the work product of another professional without compliance with our profissional standards is a violation of the very core of the ETHIC RULE of USPAP. The follow on point would be that any public agency asking for exemption from or working outside of the ETHICS RULE deserves to have their charter removed since it would be damaging to the public trust.

This would be an open petition to the AF, ASB,AQB, ASC and all state regulatory agencies, not just Illinois, but it could be used by you.

I will be out of town the next several days teaching USPAP in Wilmington, NC. I'll call when I get back.

Regards

Tom Hildebrandt GAA

 

[George Hatch]

Tom,

Why don't you use Wayne's poll option and open a thread? Let's find out what the folks who watch this forum think.

George

 

[bradellis]

Pat,

I was trying to stay out of this, but a couple of your comments really got to me. Let em set the record straight- THESE ARE FACTS:

1. Your own statement about attending a "Day with the Committee" proves my earlier statement that the exception to STD3 existed before the current administration. It is NOT new. That said, if it bugs you and others enough, I'd suggest you talk to the OBRE about their reasoning. As I said before, I cannot recall the reasoning; however, I DO recall asking the very question of Larry Bullock in an open meeting and did get at least a "logical" answer. Again, I am NOT saying that I agree- only that there was at least reasoning behind that concept.

2. As to ICAP being "chummy" with Larry Bullock, maybe you should talk to some people who are actually involved. I'll just tell you straight out that I took Larry to task-publically- over his notion that an appraiser could not do a drive-by. He said it publically, and I (a board member then) openly disagreed with him- even going so far as to offer to let him see one of my own drive-by reports. The result? ICAP sponsored a "Day with the Committee" with a half day course on how to do a drive-by- taught by Joe Magdziarz of Rockford.

Since his appointment to the ICAP board- done by the AI (each organization gets to appoint their own reps), he has sniped at almost everything done by the OBRE. Do not take my word for it- call John Miaso(AI) and Stephanie Englehart (NAMA) and ask them. Both are past ICAP Presidents. NO-NO-NO. Larry's relationship with the ICAP board is nothing close to "chummy". It is not even "cordial" or polite.

3. You say that Mike Brown has no appraisal experience. Wrong again! I have know Mike personally for many years, and I know- FOR A FACT- that he is a very very experienced appraiser. He was formally designated with the IAAO (I think- and dropped it when he was appointed to the PTAB to avoid apparent conflict of interest. PTAB ruled on the assessments by assessors, many of whom are IAAO members). I personally have seen his work and it is very good- right down to paired sales analysis. He holds- or held- the IFA designation from NAIFA and had to jump through all the hoops- proving education, experience, and demo reports. He had to get it due to the provision in IL law that used to require that the state appraisal director hold a designation from an appraisal foundation sponsor (such provision credited to Larry Bullock).

I'd suggest you check your facts on these last 2 items. Easy to do with but a couple of phone calls. Start with John Miaso, SRA at 312-666-5004.

Brad Ellis, IFA, RAA

 

[Pat Butler]

Brad-- I don't remember the exact answer that Larry gave at the seminar regarding the Std3 exemption, but I do remember that it didn't make sense and that he didn't do a good job answering it. It really took him by suprise. I've never heard a good reason from anyone why the state should not have to follow the same rules that we do. If Std3 is supposed to be so necessary for us, then why isn't it for the state?

As to Larry being chummy with ICAP, I stand by my comments. It's unfathomable that the prior director of OBRE would actually be a member of an organization that should have goals that are contrary to his prior responsibilities.

Regarding Mike Brown-- I've been told by a number of people that he has no appraisal experience. If that's wrong then I stand corrected. I also remember having lunch with two senior people at NAIFA and was told that Mike Brown received his credentials by simply showing up and accepting the designation without the requisite requirements.

Brad-- have you and I met? Please excuse my memory. Was it you that had lunch with Chip Wagner and myself in Chicago a few years ago during an AI class?

Pat

 

[David C. Johnson]

Brad,

Welcome back.

You were a board member of ICAP (as opposed to OBRE), Right?

Is there any question in your mind but that Standard 3 Reviews should be standard operating procedure on the part of any state appraisal board when putting someone's livelihood at stake?

And particularly when he/she is to be judged & juryed by competitors -- regardless of whether these board members may or may not have been selected for service based on their appraisal-related and USPAP-related expertise?

I find the fact that there is even discussion of this issue to be both amusing and sad. Mainly sad.

I agree there are some issues where it is obviously not required -- such as for factual discrepancies or perhaps some types of apparent fraud. I am not talking about those cases.

I think it would be highly appropriate for you to speak up on this issue. All appraisers should! Those who represent, or who have represented, the interest of other appraisers in the state certainly should.

Are you saying you do not have an opinion? How could that be? Or that you are afraid to voice it? Or what?

Do we have any constitutional rights in this country that you feel similarly about?

What in the world gives, Brad?

Sincerely,

David C. Johnson, Raleigh

appraisco@aol.com

 

[bradellis]

Pat,

1. I did not hear larry's response to you so I cannt comment upon whther or not it would satisfy me. I have never said I was for or against STD3 being a part of the enforcement process- only that there were "reasons" for it- and you have confirmed this.

2. Larry Bullock is on the ICAP board because the AI nominated him. He has been a protagonist against the OBRE and has not supported some of the ICAP board's positions. Some board members told me that he has caused them no end of grief. If that is what you call "chummy", well I cannot keep you from interpreting anything you want anyway you want. I would NOT call the relationship chummy in any way.

3. Mike Brown completed EVERY requirement for his NAIFA designation- just like everyone else who earned it. I saw his file and his demo reports. You now have the truth, but I'll admit that there was one accomodation made to him- his file was Fedexed to the chair of the Admissions committee who reviewed it and fedexed it back to national. We normally use the mail. That was the ONLY help given to him. He IS an appraiser and a GOOD one and has been for many many years.

Anyone who tells you different is either an idiot or is intentionally lying to you for whatever their own purposes are. Mike is still a designated IFA and is in good standing in the association.

I do not recall taking any AI courses with Chip- but he is a friend of mine. It is possible we met but I do not recall this lunch.

Brad Ellis, IFA,RAA

 

[bradellis]

David,

I do not have an opinion on this because I have not yet formed one. I am in the process of doing this right now- AFTER I investigate the circumstances, ideas, and opinions of both sides to the issue.

And yes, I do have constitutional areas that I feel strongly about. One of them is free speech which includes the right to NOT offer an opinion before one is ready to do so. Sorry if this offends your sensibilities, but too bad.

If and when I form my opinion, you will not be the first to know.

Brad Ellis, IFA,RAA

 

[Tom Hildebrandt]

Brad

Been away over the weekend, and am glad to see you back on the forum.

I understand that you have not formed an opinion; I just can not imagine what other information you might want before you make up your mind. What other information are you seeking? Perhaps I can help fill in the blanks.

From reading the posts, I gather that Larry Bullock is associated with the AI (my directory indicates that he is an SRA) and that he represents the AI in the this ICAP organization. Does Larry support a Std 3 exemption for investigators/appraisers working for an regulatory agency, and if so, does this mean that the AI supports such exemptions?

Regards

Tom Hildebrandt GAA

 

[bradellis]

Tom,

I am trying to get some very specific info as to why various state boards have adopted this exemption to STD-3- that's all. IF, it has to do with potential defense of lawsuits that would raise our licensing fees; IF it inhibits the investigators; IF- well- anything.

I just see no value here in NOT being prudent, investigating the situation, analyzing the data, and THEN forming my opinion (just like I do with an appraisal assignment). I DO see potential problems in not being prudent.

Sorry if it is taking a while, but no one on this forum hesitates to opine on everything and anything- so why is this such a probem for everyone? My not having an opinion will not stop anyone else from having one- never has before.

Unfortunately, it means (for me) waiting for phone calls to be returned, etc. and I work full time so it can take some time.

I do not know if Larry Bullock supports non-compliance with STD-3 or not. He did not require it- in fact prohibited it- when he was the state director. Frankly, I have not spoken to him since the day he was appointed to the ICAP board, and have no reason to speak with him. Many of my friends in IL believe he has gone off the deep end- but that is another story that I'll not get into. I have no first hand knowledge. It would be my guess that, if he happens to now support it, it would likely be because he sees some personal benefit.

Brad Ellis, IFA, RAA