TAF Partnered With REVAA

[George Hatch]

Lol. Good one.


Appraisers who post on social media or forums using their real names usually fall into a few categories:

1. **Industry Insiders:** They’re well-connected with the big players so they don’t have much to worry about.
2. **Semi-Retired Folks:** They’re mostly done with full-time appraisals and might just do some occasional side work.
3. They’ve got a license or certification but haven’t done any actual appraisal work in ages, like Glenn Walker.
4. **Specialized in Niche Areas:** They don’t do any GSE work, which accounts for most of the appraisals in the Country. Their specialty might be a niche or not all that relevant in the bigger picture.
5. They are heading into retirement and could care less what happens in the industry and so they side with the shills on the forum.

There are other reasons of course but these are the main ones.

Most appraisers post anonymously for the same reason they send anonymous feedback to the CFPB: they’re afraid of being blacklisted by TAF’s partners and the IAC council members.

English, do you speak it?

The word "shill" has a definition and you keep misusing the term. I don't see anyone on this forum whose actions would fit that definition.

 

[RCA]

REVAA will be Partner #16. Partners have no voting rights to the board of trustees.

"Partner organizations have the ability to nominate individuals to become Partner Trustees on the Foundation Board of Trustees, but there is no direct appointment. Final selections of all trustees are made by the Board of Trustees in consultation with the Trustee Nominating Committee."

Now, if you ask me, all REVAA has to do is nominate - and it shall be - based on the quick 100% approval of their Partner status.

 

[George Hatch]

If there are 67 "partners" what makes anyone think a REVAA nomination - if they even make one - will automatically be among those selected by the BOT?

Even if an AMC employee was appointed directly to the ASB or the AQB, how is any one vote on either board going to prevail over all the others? And while we're at it, what changes could possibly be made to USPAP to make it hostile to the economic interests of fee appraisers?

Hasn't anyone in this thread thought this theory through? All the action on the business side is occurring at the lenders and what their regulators allow them to do. Appraisal Standards and Appraiser Qualifications don't touch upon any aspect of the AMC-vs-Appraisers fight. Even the new org Hampstead is fronting is apparently aware that they have to work on the govt to bring the AMCs under control.

 

[RCA]

English, do you speak it?

The word "shill" has a definition and you keep misusing the term. I don't see anyone on this forum whose actions would fit that definition.

Now, now, it could be there are shills on this forum. There is a secondary definition of "shill" - "A person who publicizes or praises something or someone for reasons of self-interest, personal profit, or friendship or loyalty."

 

[George Hatch]

If that's the definition you want to use then we have several shills including some who are blatantly shilling for their own self-interests.

 

[RCA]

If that's the definition you want to use then we have several shills including some who are blatantly shilling for their own self-interests.

You keep throwing the darts into the second ring. You do.

Anyway, you don't know anyone's self-interests. You certainly think you do. Maybe you get it in the second ring, but not bullseye. Can't say that is so bad. At least it's reasonable, even though not accurate.

 

[chad hampton]

I prefer people that shill for the tens of thousands of working appraisers in the profession rather than corporate interests of a few. But I’m sure the hedge funds appreciate the help. Maybe they think one day they’ll be invited to the party on15th street.

And some of you want to know why appraisers don’t use their real name? Are you being serious? Get on social media and LinkedIn, it’s full of appraisers who use their own name and speak their mind and then talk about how they’ve been blacklisted from the business. I assume most of them have wealthy spouses and didn’t really need this job. when you speak about the profession, you risk losing your career. That’s the system some of you defend.

I believe people will get what’s coming to them in the end.

 

[chad hampton]

And honestly- members, partner, sponsors, iac, etc. it’s all a big pile of disgusting horse****. I don’t care what group anyone is in. I’ve sat in rooms with Revaa spokespeople, they are all the same. There is nothing about Reva that promotes or protects the public trust. This would’ve been a good time to teach them that lesson. Somebody in that call should have laid out some things that Revaa must do before they will be given consideration for your vote. Instead, you all just sat there like a bunch of cowards and saying “aye”. Despicable.

 

[George Hatch]

If you can identify a legitimate complaint as per the TAF criteria then I'll be more than happy to "shill" it because right is right. But in the video posted the TAF heads go to lengths to explain that TAF is trying to actively solicit everyone's input. They are deliberately trying to refrain from excluding anyone's input. This intent is not a bug in their program, it's a feature.

 

[Zoe]

If you can identify a legitimate complaint as per the TAF criteria then I'll be more than happy to "shill" it because right is right. But in the video posted the TAF heads go to lengths to explain that TAF is trying to actively solicit everyone's input. They are deliberately trying to refrain from excluding anyone's input. This intent is not a bug in their program, it's a feature.

I know what they are doing. They are trying to keep CFPB off their A**.

That head dude blew his interview in appraisal bias hearing. He was sweating.