Subject: Don't just vent about UAD 3.6

[George Hatch]

the day they let the mortgage brokers estimate value without useless USPAP...was the beginning of the end...but do not fret they will reap what they have sown prove me wrong

User decision, user responsibility

 

[djd09]

which part of USPAP allows our clients/competitors to steal our data and use it against us...and my girl likes to party all the time party all the time party all the time

 

[DWiley]

tell them dw...USPAP is so crystal clear they only need 400 aos and 600 faqs

The recent posts illustrate well why so much of that "extra stuff" is required. Many insert words into USPAP that are not there (like claiming USPAP once required an appraiser inspection) and the "other communications" help clean up the mess than can be created when they do that.

 

[chad hampton]

USPAP (TAF) has never required an inspection OF ANY KIND, much less an inspection by a licensed professional. And certainly if inspection is not required, then there can be no requirement about who inspects. That is why the DID or DID NOT inspect option was in USPAP from Day 1.

The requirement for a personal inspection by the appraiser was an additional requirement. And, I hope you are sitting down, it was an additional requirement created by the GSEs. Things change, and that is no longer a GSE requirement in many assignments.

It even gave some specific examples of something a non-licensed person can do during an inspection - Hold the end of the tape or write down measurements. Those are non-significant tasks.

Don't be mad, I wasn't the one that wrote it. I just read it. Even highlighted it. But that was back when I thought USPAP was a serious document.

 

[djd09]

The recent posts illustrate well why so much of that "extra stuff" is required. Many insert words into USPAP that are not there (like claiming USPAP once required an appraiser inspection).

cant be credible if the subject information is wrong...so there is that

 

[George Hatch]

It even gave some specific examples of something a non-licensed person can do during an inspection - Hold the end of the tape or write down measurements. Those are non-significant tasks.

Don't be mad, I wasn't the one that wrote it. I just read it. Even highlighted it. But that was back when I thought USPAP was a serious document.

You are not referencing USPAP.

Let me help you out. Here is a more accurate sentence:

"Don't be mad, I wasn't the one that wrote it. I just read it. Even highlighted it. But that was back when I thought USPAP the AO was a serious universally binding document." across all assignment types, in perpetuity and unchangeable regardless of any changes in the available information or technology.​

 

[DWiley]

It even gave some specific examples of something a non-licensed person can do during an inspection - Hold the end of the tape or write down measurements. Those are non-significant tasks.

Don't be mad, I wasn't the one that wrote it. I just read it. Even highlighted it. But that was back when I thought USPAP was a serious document.

Yeah, the AO did say that - and none of that was USPAP. That is the part you can't grasp. Actually, you grasp it, you just choose not to because it does not align with your personal view about the criticality of the inspection.

 

[chad hampton]

You guys ae good at spin and mental gymnastics. I never claimed you weren't.

Some might even call you misleading. That shouldn't be allowed per the NDA.

Only took a few years to get you guys to actually admit that, in fact, it was mentioned in that book.

 

[George Hatch]

cant be credible if the subject information is wrong...so there is that

So your interpretation of "credible" is that all the info must be perfectly accurate before it can be used?

That doesn't even make any sense. If a zero defect info environment exists then why do we assert ANY limitations (to the best of my knowledge and belief)? How can you possibly perform any appraisal without personally developing every scrap of info about the subject and all comparables and all other info in the report?

Nobody in the marketplace expects that unless/until we're talking about appraisers not getting the volume and fees they want.

 

[George Hatch]

You guys ae good at spin and mental gymnastics. I never claimed you weren't.

Some might even call you misleading. That shouldn't be allowed per the NDA.

Only took a few years to get you guys to actually admit that, in fact, it was mentioned in that book.

It's never been mentioned in USPAP. The "book" to which you refer includes 3 publications of separate intent and title, of which only one is USPAP.

That "spin and mental gymnastics" is the last resort of the people who have figured out that the facts don't support their myths. Your criticism is that you don't have the competency with the material that it takes to refute those facts as stated (and as posted via screengrab).

You might as well waving a white flag and signing the surrender documents.