Regulator wins TAF CEO position

[Mejappz]

Just because this is often repeated does not make it true. Parroting it here proves folks have no clue, but love to pretend.

YOU don’t have a clue. The recent governance overhaul that you keep bringing up was enacted recently **after** the **** hit the fan.

 

[Dublin ohio]

The vast majority of appraisers are self-employed individuals working on their own. How many TAF board members or representatives are in that class?

My question would be how many actually threw their hat into the ring. TAF has a Youtube video on how to apply to the BOT. Judging from the number of views (502). It doesn't seem that anybody is beating down the doors

 

[RCA]

There's still no sign of what the critics believe TAF could do to alter the way lenders do business with fee appraisers. Whatever the answer is to that question, it apparently goes without saying.

The whole appraisal infrastructure is a complex system of many feedback loops.
If TAF created a standard that covered in detail the protocols of the different appraisal methods, without ambiguity, without allowing contradictory interpretations to be drawn, appraisers would be able to more safely do appraisals and avoid the risks they currently have dealing with lenders. The lenders themselves would indeed have to alter their behavior whenever it conflicts with USPAP.

GH - you are always putting the cart before the horse - on this forum very often kowtowing to the lenders with respect to appraisal issues under the pretext that they are making the so-called "decisions" for which they need an appraisal. The job of the appraiser is to take the SOW from a client, run it against the standards and regulations to eliminate unacceptable portions of the SOW, send the corrected SOW back to the lender/client, - and if he agrees to the changes, then objectively perform the required appraisal.

So, by altering the USPAP standard, of course TAF can effectively alter lender behavior.

Unfortunately the USPAP standard is so lax, it gives the lenders great latitude in requesting changes to reports from appraisers, as well as great latitude to attorneys hired to sue appraisers.

 

[Dublin ohio]

YOU don’t have a clue. The recent governance overhaul that you keep bringing up was enacted recently **after** the **** hit the fan.

Serious question. What was changed

 

[George Hatch]

The whole appraisal infrastructure is a complex system of many feedback loops.
If TAF created a standard that covered in detail the protocols of the different appraisal methods, without ambiguity, without allowing contradictory interpretations to be drawn, appraisers would be able to more safely do appraisals and avoid the risks they currently have dealing with lenders. The lenders themselves would indeed have to alter their behavior whenever it conflicts with USPAP.

GH - you are always putting the cart before the horse - on this forum very often kowtowing to the lenders with respect to appraisal issues under the pretext that they are making the so-called "decisions" for which they need an appraisal. The job of the appraiser is to take the SOW from a client, run it against the standards and regulations to eliminate unacceptable portions of the SOW, send the corrected SOW back to the lender/client, - and if he agrees to the changes, then objectively perform the required appraisal.

So, by altering the USPAP standard, of course TAF can effectively alter lender behavior.

Unfortunately the USPAP standard is so lax, it gives the lenders great latitude in requesting changes to reports from appraisers, as well as great latitude to attorneys hired to sue appraisers.

USPAP is a minimum standard. Virtually all lenders have additional requirements in addition to those minimums, and are free to increase those as much as they want. Except that IRL none of them get that much more demanding than their competitors.

If your plan is to increase the minimums and FORCE the lenders to buy more than they want then that might have some unintended consequences. As evidenced by the trend toward ordering less-than-1004 alternatives if/when they can.

Meanwhile, refer to tagline below:

​

​

​

​

​

 

[Dublin ohio]

Unfortunately the USPAP standard is so lax, it gives the lenders great latitude in requesting changes to reports from appraisers,

USPAP does not "give" lenders anything. The lenders are and have been free to ask for whatever they want. It is still up to the appraiser on how they respond. I have lost count of how many times I have said no can do

 

[Francois K. Gregoire]

My question would be how many actually threw their hat into the ring. TAF has a Youtube video on how to apply to the BOT. Judging from the number of views (502). It doesn't seem that anybody is beating down the doors

For the three Public Interest positions available in 2025, 78 people tossed their hat in the ring.

 

[Dublin ohio]

For the three Public Interest positions available in 2025, 78 people tossed their hat in the ring.

Correct me if I am mistaken. But being an appraiser is not a requirement for those positions

 

[djd09]

who wrote ao 16...

 

[Francois K. Gregoire]

Correct me if I am mistaken. But being an appraiser is not a requirement for those positions

You are correct. However the Trustee Nomination Committee identifies composition goals (targets) which apply to all open seats regardless of whether they are partner-nominated or public interest. An ideal Board composition would include a mix of representation from:

• Licensed/Certified real property appraisers covering – Residential, Commercial, Agricultural, Mass Appraisals, and Eminent Domain
• Qualified appraisers (those who follow USPAP) from unregulated disciplines – Business Valuation, Personal Property, International valuers
• Real Estate Brokers/Agents
• Consumers or Consumer advocates
• Civil Rights advocates
• Fair Housing advocates
• Banking/Lending/Finance representatives
• Academics
• Others with an interest in valuation, including those from the legal community