Timid,
http://oregonaclb.org/media/Spring2008Newsletter.pdf
Go to page ten and read paragraphs two and five. While the article is obviously discussing the 1004, I am very sure we can apply the same statements to the 2055. Then find for me something from Fannie that says an appraiser is
not contravening the SOW on the 2055 when that appraiser adds EA's not preprinted on the 2055 via an addendum. Versus adds some by using CB4 that requires an inspection. I guess we all could use CB4 and require we inspect the subject in order to confirm our own EA's. A bit self-defeating to the exterior only assignment however I would say.
My board may have been trying to make a strong point when they placed "
not permitted" in bold font at the end of paragraph two.
Webbed.
Webbed Footed One, As you are aware, this opinion goes to the use of the Fannie Mae forms for non-lending purposes, although some of the statements in the opinion apply to any use of the Fannie Mae forms. Regarding my points, I agree that the SOW cannot be limited or changed from that of the preprinted SOW (though it can certainly be expanded). However, nowhere on the form or in Fannie guidelines can I find any prohibition from the appraiser further explaining exactly what he and did not do under the SOW in the development and reporting of the appraisal. In fact, I believe that such an explanation is required under the USPAP Scope of Work rule:
For each appraisal, appraisal review, and appraisal consulting assignment, an appraiser must:
1...
2...
3. dosclose the scope of work in the report.
Regarding, the issue of using an extraordinary assumption in a Fannie Mae 2055 exterior only, the Fannie Mae form itself in the preprinted certifications part of the form bars addtional "assumptions", but not additional "extraordinary assumptions". These two terms have separate definitions in the USPAP definitions section and these 2 terms are listed separately under USPAP Standards Rule 2-1(c). Additionally, the Fannie Form itself provides a check box for the use of an extraordinary assumption right on the form....if you contend that the term "extraordinary assumption" is included in the meaning of the term "assumption" as used in the preprinted Fannie Mae certification pages, then checking this box and making the appraisal report subject to inspection...based upon an "extraordinary assumption" would be a violation of the Fannie preprinted certifications.....surely that cannot be the case and this demonstrates clearly that the preprinted language in the Fannie Mae form on this issue clearly does not contemplate barring the use of EA's....
Finally, I am sure that you agree that the only way to do a credible EA appraisal, without the appraiser actually measuring the subject property and comparable sales themselves, is for the appraiser to use an EA that the GLA figures that he uses in the report is substantially correct. (Obviosuly the appraiser must have a reasonable basis to believe that the source used for the GLA figures is accurate)
Since many if not most states incorporate USPAP into state law and Federal Banking regulations require that appraisals done for federally related mortgage transactions conform to USPAP, the Fannie preprinted language that states:
However, additional certifications that do not constitute material alterations to this appraisal report, such as those required by law.....are permitted.
would seem to allow the appraiser to disclose any EA's used in the appraisal.
Thus, I do not see anyway for the Oregon board or any other board to hang the appraiser over this issue unless the board is prepared to say that it is impossible to complete a USPAP compliant Exterior Only Appraisal on the current Fannie Mae Form 2055 unless the appraiser actually measures the subject property himself......boards can do whatever they chose, but I am pretty willing to take the risk that the boards rule over my practice are not going to do that.
