Significant Appraisal Assistance (1004p)

[J Grant]

Oh, so there's been no talk about C&R issues?


So mount the appeal to the ASB to get them to change the definitions in USPAP in order to fight our own clients on behalf of their borrowers. Start with the PREAMBLE where we have asserted that it's the clients and intended users of these services who form the basis of the public trust in the appraisal profession and work your way down from there.

'Cause that's how deep into it you're going to need to go in order to protect the real estate market from the excesses of the lenders.

Well the intended users (secondary market /investors ) do benefit from disclosures and better standards needed now vs earlier since market is changing. They are part of the public trust and it is hard to argue keeping disclosures absent or fuzzy benefits clients as well. I fail to see how an honest disclosure means we are "fighting" our own clients but we can have different viewpoints on that.

I don't think the permeable and the rest of USPAP has to be re worked for a change of must be disclosed in a report as contributing significant appraisal assistance , when a person does an inspection of a subject for appraisal purpose.

 

[George Hatch]

What's meaningful is as self-defined for the secondary market as it is for the original users. If they don't think these appraisals are sufficiently credible they'll demand more from their end.

As for your opinion about inspections, you've expressed that quite clearly. Those pesky definitions still stand in your way, though.


I can just imagine someone asserting that they perform "USPAP-compliant inspections" .

 

[J Grant]

https://theappraisercoach.com/what-...osed-on-an-appraisal-report-and-how-to-do-it/

 

[J Grant]

What's meaningful is as self-defined for the secondary market as it is for the original users. If they don't think these appraisals are sufficiently credible they'll demand more from their end.
As for your opinion about inspections, you've expressed that quite clearly. Those pesky definitions still stand in your way, though.
I can just imagine someone asserting that they perform "USPAP-compliant inspections" .

It is not a "USPAP compliant inspection", it is an appraisal compliant with USPAP, including disclosures. We don't separate out other segments in this manner, "A USPAP complaint cost approach" or a "USPAP compliant Sales comparison approach.". But if were were to separate segments assume it would mean a segment compliant with keeping a work file, not misleading etc

If changing USPAP to clarify inspector provided significant appraisal assistance means that person who inspects is engaged in appraisal practice so be it. Users can decide what is meaningful to them for their purpose, USPAP can decide what is meaningful to the appraisal profession .

It might hinge on : is an inspection performed for appraisal purpose mere "data collection", or is it a significant appraisal function integral to results ?

A property is not a set of facts that can be "data collected", it is a physical entity of varying conditions, influences, positives and negatives. Two people might come away with a different set of "data" from it and we know that varus inspectors inspect from the perspective of tehir professional purpose. A pest inspector is looking for infestation and does not care about upgrades, a RE agent is there to see how property can be marketed, a home inspector is there for repairs and not concerned with value, etc. An appraiser inspects from a comparative and value eccentric perspective, they are not merely there to robot like "collect "data" ..

Why doesn't a home inspector send a person who took a 2 hour webinar out to "data collect" for them? The person and the home inspector will perform the same rote tasks, climb a ladder, tun on the water etc. Yet people expect the home inspector themselves out there, since they know more reliable results come from first hand vs second hand

USPAP does not anticipate , it reacts to major changes in the market ( as it added a section on AVM's)

I would think the inspection /sig assistance disclosures were established with the view of an appraiser using their own trainee or an assistant, rather than the large scale influx of non appraiser third parties inserted or the inspection purpose of appraisal.

 

[djd09]

USPAP is junk.
roof top party on 15th st.
i forgot no 'criticizing' the insiders.
in the end some chief appraiser will get millions for being a whistle blower for poor appraisal practice. (true stories)

 

[George Hatch]

It is not a "USPAP compliant inspection", it is an appraisal compliant with USPAP, including disclosures. We don't separate out other segments in this manner, "A USPAP complaint cost approach" or a "USPAP compliant Sales comparison approach.". But if were were to separate segments assume it would mean a segment compliant with keeping a work file, not misleading etc

If changing USPAP to clarify inspector provided significant appraisal assistance means that person who inspects is engaged in appraisal practice so be it. Users can decide what is meaningful to them for their purpose, USPAP can decide what is meaningful to the appraisal profession .

It might hinge on : is an inspection performed for appraisal purpose mere "data collection", or is it a significant appraisal function integral to results ?

A property is not a set of facts that can be "data collected", it is a physical entity of varying conditions, influences, positives and negatives. Two people might come away with a different set of "data" from it and we know that varus inspectors inspect from the perspective of tehir professional purpose. A pest inspector is looking for infestation and does not care about upgrades, a RE agent is there to see how property can be marketed, a home inspector is there for repairs and not concerned with value, etc. An appraiser inspects from a comparative and value eccentric perspective, they are not merely there to robot like "collect "data" ..

Why doesn't a home inspector send a person who took a 2 hour webinar out to "data collect" for them? The person and the home inspector will perform the same rote tasks, climb a ladder, tun on the water etc. Yet people expect the home inspector themselves out there, since they know more reliable results come from first hand vs second hand

USPAP does not anticipate , it reacts to major changes in the market ( as it added a section on AVM's)

I would think the inspection /sig assistance disclosures were established with the view of an appraiser using their own trainee or an assistant, rather than the large scale influx of non appraiser third parties inserted or the inspection purpose of appraisal.

It's nice to have hopes and dreams. There's a windmill over yonder ----> Go git 'em.

 

[bnmappraisal]

A property is not a set of facts that can be "data collected",

What? Of course it's a set of facts (i.e. Comp Shingle roof, 2 car garage, sliding glass doors, laminate flooring, etc ...)
All facts about a property that pretty much any semi-intelligent adult can describe

it is a physical entity of varying conditions, influences, positives and negatives. Two people might come away with a different set of "data"[/QUOTE]
(my bold) And of course they do/will. It's human nature
I sometimes tell a joke "Ask 2 different appraisers their opinion of value and you'll get 3 different answers!" (Dumb joke, I know, but it goes along with the "two people..." comment)

 

[J Grant]

I should have stated it more clearly in that one post- while a property contains facts, it is more than a set of facts. Otherwise, all the properties with the same "facts" would sell for the same price ! Yet we see 2 properties that might have a report of identical facts sell and perform in the market differently.

Facts are present at an inspection, but an appraiser does more than rote collecting facts" when they inspect- or is that all you do? Are you forming observations and impressions of the site and dwelling and amenities, any area/site noise or influences and the natural light or darkness of rooms, extent of depreciation or repair and how the floor plans flow etc, that will inform the value and other opinions?

Do you think some of that will me missing, or reported differently , or just not possible to see, than if you had inspected?

 

[bnmappraisal]

Are you forming observations and impressions of the whole and features or defects of segments of the whole that will inform the value and other opinions?

Yes, I'm forming opinions based on my physical observations. But as with the desktops I've done for non lending work (which sound to be similar tot he 1004p - I use the GPAR form in Total which looks pretty similar to the 1004 by Fannie) I'm relying on MLS/client provided photos and County/MLS/Client provided sketch/GLA

Our MLS here (I believe you have the same on the other coast - MFRMLS) allows agents to have up to 50 pics of a property. That's a lot of pics for a 1,400 sf ranch (and yes, they sometimes utilize all 50 pics for such a property!) I can pretty much get a decent "observation" of what the property is like without actually inspecting it

Again, I'm going to stick by my prior comments on this and say it's about the fee(s)

For $300-400+/ report, I would have no problem doing 1004p's (and obviously that would depend on the property - there are plenty of private/non lending properties I do NOT offer a desktop option, although, yes, in theory, it is still possible to complete that appraisal - I just don't want to take that liability - business decision)

 

[J Grant]

Lol RE agents sure can come up with a very different set of "facts" about a property than appraisers do! Expcept for the basics, ( a ranch vs 2 story, and sometimes even that is screwed up if it is a partial below grade ) outside of that, one could almost think it was a different property sometimes.

Condo has an ocean view ! Really? If you stand on one corner of the balcony with binoculars...house has 4 bedrooms ( one is a nook with no window ) etc...and they exclude /ignore any facts that are adverse- the lot backing up to a dump , the roof near end of economic life. Can they be trained to overcome years of biased reporting of facts on inspections.? Maybe some can and others may not. Since we don;t choose who inspects, we simply will not know