Gotcha. It is not a "Standard" until it is published in USPAP.
Doesn't matter if the writer is head of the ASC, ASB, or USofA, until it hits an officially published Standard, Advisory Opinion, FAQ, or the new one called a "Guideline" it is supplemental information and is not binding. Potentially useful
in context, but not out of context like you try to push.
Thanks for playing!
Actually, it seems to me that your logic is faulty.
When two people can read the same documents over and over and their interpretations continue to vary it may be that the topic is not one of logic and science but has strayed into the territory of "belief" ...
BTW, one thing that is stated in Guidenote 11 is that if one uses a distressed sale and does not adjust the appraiser must comment. Any argument on that?
Yeah, but we *should* all be interpreting the definitions the same way, the fact that we are not is concerning.
The AIRREA 8th Edition definition would seem to fit George's and JGrant's interpretation and if that one was used I would have no arguments except to ask "are you stating the specific market conditions in your report?"
The Rev.Ed. definition appears more similar to the current and has those two terms that cause trouble: "fair sale" and "undue stimulus". We not have some appraisers claiming the meaning of "undue" is "atypical for the local market".
Actually, we "discussed" Guidenote 11 at length for most the thread. Turns out it is possible for some people to interpret that differently than others.
