Significant Appraisal Assistance (1004p)

[glenn walker]

It does not say in USPAP that you have to inspect your subject property, so why ask it? But USPAP does address disclosures and naming level of assistance if someone else inspects. your subject .

Significant Assistance ? So that's the question at hand and but if the appraiser cant sleep at night there is nothing stopping him/her from disclosing in his/her report that a third party inspector was used - Why not add a little more liability to that bad-boy. : ) LOL

 

[DWiley]

Great find T!

seems despite USPAP double talk an .an inspection of subject for appraisal is part of appraisal practice/acting as an appraiser- though one ( FAQ is still not USPAP ) said inspection is not appraisal practice if it offers no opinions. But the very act of performing an inspection means a person dong it must apply judgments and opinions since it is not just "gathering data"- a dwelling and site consists of varying sets of conditions and influences and quality levels.. An inspector has to decide in each step should this area be measured as dwelling sf or not, should I mark it as roof needs repair or not..., is that noise from the traffic an issue or not, or easier not to mention it - opinions of what "facts" to include /exclude how to describe what is there, or classify it etc.

Fannie is good at obfuscation and calling an inspection of a property "data gathering" is like calling eating a meal "ingesting nutrition".. it misses the essence of it and the worth in $ and reasons behind a consumer choosing a restaurant or dish. One can get the same nutrition in ingredients and calories from two vastly different culinary experience commanding two very different prices and customers in the market.

A remote inspection by proxy is s like paying someone to eat a meal for you when you are supposed to review a restaurant or dish. The person eating the meal sends back a list of ingredients and calories a photo of what they choose to picture. Okay.....

A subject inspection involves more than rote "collecting data" though fannie is trying to sell it as such in order to allow non appraisers to do it and not be named as contributing significant appraisal assistance.

Yes. A good find of the ASB contradicting themselves. That passage has been pointed out to them multiple times. Expect edits

 

[DWiley]

... there is nothing stopping him/her from disclosing in his/her report that a third party inspector was used

I would go further and say that such a disclosure would be required under the SOW RULE (though it would not have to be in the certification as significant real property appraisal assistance).

No one is saying that there should not be clear disclosure that a third party was used.

 

[djd09]

"Appraisers must demonstrate competency in properly calculating GLA by knowing when to separate above and below grade finish. Competency is a foundation of USPAP and a rule for appraisers. A majority of the time, GLA is a motivating factor for buyers in the market, so it must be properly calculated with the appraiser’s data confirmation as a form of checks and balances to ensure the right information is being used. Enjoy your hours of data confirmation and drive by inspections appraisers; embrace this task, your coffee and steering wheel, turn up the volume and get to it, because your data is only as good as your confirmation sources. Other real estate professionals should find it useful knowing how appraisers are required by the secondary market to calculate GLA. By demonstrating consistency in our application of basic measurement techniques, we can provide consistent and accurate data to our appraiser peers. Most importantly we can continue to provide reliable advice and accurate information to homeowners, real estate agents and the lending community, further promoting the public trust of appraisers, just the way USPAP tells us to.

Guy Andrews, SRA, certified residential appraiser of CMA Appraisals, INC and immediate past president of the Vermont Chapter of the Appraisal Institute, Montpelier, VT."

http://nerej.com/gross-living-area-in-regard-to-an-appraisal-report-by-guy-andrews

Not so long ago.

 

[J Grant]

I would go further and say that such a disclosure would be required under the SOW RULE (though it would not have to be in the certification as significant real property appraisal assistance).

No one is saying that there should not be clear disclosure that a third party was used.

That's the issue ( and imo fannie sought legal counsel how to do an end run around the significant appraisal assistance named applied to the individual inspecting...because if appraisers had to disclose it as such, that would mean an appraiser would have to be the inspector ( rather than a RE agent or any random person )

Fannie does an end run by 1) the incorrect usage of FAQ 31 it is not sig assistance if individual WRITES measurements appraiser provides ( ignoring the fact that is not what happened ; the individual measured ) and claiming an inspection suddenly is "data collection" ( but they won't call it that to parties, will make an appointment for an appraisal inspection-) The form will have a check box the appraiser did not inspect / third party did, strategically placed in mouse type so borrower won;t notice it.

Fannie is serving agenda of Quicken Loans, their CEO's and upper management should be audited how much Quicken Loan stock they have, what is their connection to Clear Capital, one of the worst, fee fishing outfits around why is that the official tester...we can figure out why Amrock is (quciken ) of course they will report back positive green light non appraisers doing a great job inspecting...it suss their agendas to reshape appraisals in that direction If the test pilot is using hand picked affiliated companies why even bother with it they will report back what suits their interests.

 

[DWiley]

That's the issue ( and imo fannie sought legal counsel how to do an end run around the significant appraisal assistance named applied to the individual inspecting...because if appraisers had to disclose it as such, that would mean an appraiser would have to be the inspector ( rather than a RE agent or any random person )

Fannie does an end run by 1) the incorrect usage of FAQ 31 it is not sig assistance if individual WRITES measurements appraiser provides ( ignoring the fact that is not what happened ; the individual measured ) and claiming an inspection suddenly is "data collection" ( but they won't call it that to parties, will make an appointment for an appraisal inspection-) The form will have a check box the appraiser did not inspect / third party did, strategically placed in mouse type so borrower won;t notice it.

Fannie is serving agenda of Quicken Loans, their CEO's and upper management should be audited how much Quicken Loan stock they have, what is their connection to Clear Capital, one of the worst, fee fishing outfits around why is that the official tester...we can figure out why Amrock is (quciken ) of course they will report back positive green light non appraisers doing a great job inspecting...it suss their agendas to reshape appraisals in that direction If the test pilot is using hand picked affiliated companies why even bother with it they will report back what suits their interests.

That is a great story. Does not line up with the actual facts, but that usually does not stop folks on the Internet

 

[ramrcdk]

USPAP 2020-2021 CE
WILL BE an exciting class ...as NONE before! (should be an open-question-answer Forum, sadly it won't be)
I plan to take it ASAP and from an Instructor that is also an Attorney, (if he dare tread).
This Forum will help with debates & questions (USPAP, AO & FAQ) we all seem to be clear on ...maybe or not.

 

[J Grant]

That is a great story. Does not line up with the actual facts, but that usually does not stop folks on the Internet

true I got off topic and into conjecture..it is the internet...

 

[George Hatch]

USPAP 2020-2021 CE
WILL BE an exciting class ...as NONE before! (should be an open-question-answer Forum, sadly it won't be)
I plan to take it ASAP and from an Instructor that is also an Attorney, (if he dare tread).
This Forum will help with debates & questions (USPAP, AO & FAQ) we all seem to be clear on ...maybe or not.

This is ridiculous.

Danny was the chair of the ASB for years and he personally taught the Instructor's course to every one of the Instructors who qualified during the first couple rounds of Instructor Quals. They're still listening to his input and taking it seriously on the basis of his expertise. Why anyone would think they could learn more or differently from any individual instructor (or state board member) during an update course defies explanation. If you're going to indulge in the appeal to authority (someone's account of it prevails due to their status) - which you shouldn't - then it literally isn't possible to go over Danny's head in an appraisal standards discussion.

That only leaves the appeal to reason. Which you should be exercising. We all should.

 

[George Hatch]

That's the issue ( and imo fannie sought legal counsel how to do an end run around the significant appraisal assistance named applied to the individual inspecting...because if appraisers had to disclose it as such, that would mean an appraiser would have to be the inspector ( rather than a RE agent or any random person )

Fannie does an end run by 1) the incorrect usage of FAQ 31 it is not sig assistance if individual WRITES measurements appraiser provides ( ignoring the fact that is not what happened ; the individual measured ) and claiming an inspection suddenly is "data collection" ( but they won't call it that to parties, will make an appointment for an appraisal inspection-) The form will have a check box the appraiser did not inspect / third party did, strategically placed in mouse type so borrower won;t notice it.

Fannie is serving agenda of Quicken Loans, their CEO's and upper management should be audited how much Quicken Loan stock they have, what is their connection to Clear Capital, one of the worst, fee fishing outfits around why is that the official tester...we can figure out why Amrock is (quciken ) of course they will report back positive green light non appraisers doing a great job inspecting...it suss their agendas to reshape appraisals in that direction If the test pilot is using hand picked affiliated companies why even bother with it they will report back what suits their interests.

If I've said it once I must have said it..well, several dozen times at least: Fannie is not your friend. They're not an appraisal company, they're not an advocate for appraisers or appraisal issues and they will never put your interests anywhere on their top 10 list. They're just another banker (albeit a big one) , and that's how appraisers should be looking at them. We need to be familiar with their expectations for exactly the same reasons we need to be familiar with any other user's requirements - because that's part of the SOW decision and because we are obliged to hit those benchmarks in addition to - but never instead of - the other requirements in USPAP and at the applicable state/federal laws rules and regs.