Don
I know we have a difference of opinion regarding the respectability of the NCAB.
What I do not understand is your comments regarding the role of the AF and Firrea. These are two different issues. The AF (and the AQB/ASB) were vested by the government and the professional trade organizations to provide uniform standards and qualifications for appraisers. Firrea was vested with the charge to make sure states enacted legislation creating regulatory agencies that, at minuimum, required appraisers in federally related transactions to comply with the uniform standards and qualifications. The states had no choice but to accept USPAP for federally related transactions. (Actually, they could chose not to adopt USPAP, but then no appraisals for federally related transactions could be done by appraisers in the state) Some states, such as NC, have moved beyond just regulating federal transactions by adopting USPAP for all appraisal services covered by Standard 1, 2 and 3. In other words, in NC, USPAP compliance is mandatory for all real property services, not just federally related transctions, covered by these standards.
The problem is that now established, the NCAB does not like the policy and direction of the AF (and the AQB/ASB); they want the freedom to go where they wish. You are echoing that sentiment, they feel that they should have the right to decide what are appropriate standards.
These regulators do not want to be regulated. I can understand that concern, but the lack of consistent enforcement and instruction, a function in the control of the states, has lead the AF to be more strict. If the states had done their job, if they were consistent and were willing to accept the guidelines as set forth by the AF, there would be no need for increased regulation. The NCAB, and others of their ilk, feel that having been created to enforce USPAP, that they can now reinterpret USPAP to meet whatever their preconcieved notion is good or bad work product. They also feel they can provide case by case exception for USPAP compliance. They seem to feel that it is ok for a "good appraiser" to just agree with a client that he does not have to comply and he can then do appraisals or reviews without concern by the NCAB. A bad appraiser apparently does not have the same lattitude. He must comply literally with every word and phrase in USPAP, taken even out of context of the use of the appraisal. They mix and match USPAP (and other guidelines such as Freddie/Fannie) to get convictions. For example, an appraiser doing work for a legal client, totally unrelated to residential lending work, would be expected to perform those services in compliance with Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae guidelines. Whatever it takes to get the conviction.
They do not want anyone telling them that their interpretation is wrong, because they believe they are on a divine mission to get rid of bad appraisers. Bad appraisers are those they say are bad appraisers regardless of whether they comply with USPAP. If they disagree with their opinions, even if you follow recognized methods and techniques, and comply fully with USPAP, if the NCAB staff does not like your conclusion, you are a bad appraiser. Those appraisers who they consider to be good appraisers may not have even attempted to comply with USPAP, and miserepresented data and formed misleading opinions, these good appraisers go unpunished and without any admonishment.
My case, and the other appraisers who testified against me, is a perfect example. I did a text book appraisal of a condmnation property. I researched the property history for thirty years. I showed condemnation blight and appraised it appropriately under standards. The complaintant, who had a 5 year property history analysis by supplemental standards, a three year under core USPAP, admitted under oath before the NCAB staff attorney and Deputy Director that he failed to do this analysis. But they never opened a case on him, Why? Because he was a good appraiser, and other appraisers told the board he was a good appraiser. I was persecuted because these same folks told the board I was a bad appraiser. They believed the low ball values presented by the good appraisers because of theior credentials and accepted at face value their statements that I overvalued the property. This despite the fact that my lower value range matched the properties current market history and my higher value, fully reflecting blight issues was only 30% higher.
In a related action, this good appraiser who testified against me at trial said he did appraisal reviews of my work product to help his client prepare for trial. He told his client my highest and best use was wrong, and gave a list of reasons which have been subsequently were shown to be false at my hearing. He told them my methods were wrong and adjustments were wrong. He said he did these things in writing to the NCAB and in deposition for trial. He also freely admitted that he did them outside of USPAP because he felt he had a right and obligation to help his client. The NCAB staff knew all of this, they heard his testimony at my hearing and heard him admit to these failures . Yet the NCAB staff said that is not what he did at the probable cause hearing , he did not really do a review, all he did was point out differences between the reports (as opposed to expressing an opinion on the quality of the work product) and that he was free to do these work outside of USPAP. This is BS and any appraiser knows it. This is selective enforcement, and it is what the NCAB wants to keep on doing.
The staff provides misleading and factually incorrect probable cause summaries on a routine basis to the board members. The idea is to let the "good appraisers" off and convict the "bad appraisers". The problem is that no one knows what criteria the board is using to decide who is a good or bad appraiser.
Actually, I am beginning to believe I do know several criteria. You are a bad appraiser if you are critical of the board, and every appraiser in the State of North Carolina knows it. Another is that good appraisers are long term friend of the Deputy Directors. If you turn in your competition regularly, you are a good appraiser, even if your work product is absymal and does not even purport to comply with USPAP.
We will have definitive proof on this issue of selective judgement in the near future.
Sorry Don, but we certainly disagree on these issues. I am all for states rights, but the states, like NC, need to be doing the job impartially, objectively and competently, not just independently and arbitrarily, in order to get my vote for less federal regulation.
Regards
Tom Hildebrandt GAA