The Appraisal Foundation And AI At It Again.

[Meandering]

nothing more than clarification and elaboration of the basics.

And isn't it the basics that build "public trust"?

Or are the changes to accommodate too many interested parties?


2008-2009
CLIENT: the party or parties who engage an appraiser (by employment or contract) in a specific assignment.
Comment: The client identified by the appraiser in an appraisal, appraisal review, or appraisal
consulting assignment (or in the assignment workfile) is the party or parties with whom the
appraiser has an appraiser-client relationship in the related assignment, and may be an
individual, group, or entity.


2014-2016
CLIENT: the party or parties who engage, by employment or contract, an appraiser in a specific assignment.
Comment: The client may be an individual, group, or entity, and may engage and communicate with
the appraiser directly or through an agent.

Anybody got one of those "agent" agreements from an AMC?

When the final rule takes effect, the AMCs MUST be agents of the lender. But until then..........WE needed this change for................

.

 

[George Hatch]

Marion - they say the same thing. When you worked for a fee shop 30 years ago and they sent you out on an assignment for their client the client was still the client.

 

[Meandering]

Sorry, I did not work for any fee shop, ever.

When I came to this industry, and really, I'm a newbie, I know, but when I came in, the broker, the owner, the state, the local government, or the bank hired you, and they were the client, and they shopped the loan before deciding on a lender. Never dealt with "agents" except in estate work.

Right, I'm one of those terrible subprime appraisers, but I was trained commercially, and not until the last months of training did I learn anything about residential work. At that time, the broker or the owner were named as the client, and nobody ever had any issue with it, at least in my own experience.

.

 

[George Hatch]

So you have never worked under any kind of supervision or training from another appraiser? Kewl. That doesn't diminish the point. Just because the appraisal entity calls itself an appraisal department at a lender or a fee shop or an individual appraiser acting as someone's supervisor or an AMC doesn't change the nature of the appraiser/client relationship. You've got a user engaging an appraisal from someone other than the individual who did all or most of the work.

 

[Meandering]

So you have never worked under any kind of supervision or training from another appraiser? Kewl. That doesn't diminish the point. Just because the appraisal entity calls itself an appraisal department at a lender or a fee shop or an individual appraiser acting as someone's supervisor or an AMC doesn't change the nature of the appraiser/client relationship. You've got a user engaging an appraisal from someone other than the individual who did all or most of the work.

I worked with a mentor in his basement. They were all his clients. I did not work with him after certification. Therefore my clients were never his clients, and his clients were never mine. At the time, in PA, trainees were not licensed, we just signed for the portions of the report we completed. So as I said, I did not have any clients that were "agents" of anyone else, with the exception of estate work.

The point is that after the collapse of the subprime loans, and with HVCC, interested parties had to clear up that USPAP client thing, because of the wide spread use of AMCs. And it's, in my opinion, one of the driving forces behind all the USPAP changes over the decades, interested parties.


..

 

[Rick Stillman]

So you have never worked under any kind of supervision or training from another appraiser? Kewl. That doesn't diminish the point. Just because the appraisal entity calls itself an appraisal department at a lender or a fee shop or an individual appraiser acting as someone's supervisor or an AMC doesn't change the nature of the appraiser/client relationship. You've got a user engaging an appraisal from someone other than the individual who did all or most of the work.

This is exactly the kind of minutiae that has resulted in the loss of control of our very industry. We have not grown or improved - much. Others, from the outside looking in, are saying - hey, they can't even agree how to define a... report... client... market value... you name it! And on and on it goes - ad infinitum. So if we trudge and wallow through the most mundane and basic of concepts - well, no wonder the powers that be said "hell yah, somebody take control and supervise these argumentative little freaks!" And they sure did, didn't they? How do you like those reins and that muzzle? Where did that pay raise go for the last 5 to 10 years? The only answer appraisers can ever agree on is, "it depends." Those entrenched in this mentality will never find the way out of the maze, and the ones that honestly wish to simply progress and grow in some sort of profession will be constantly held back by this rehashing of rehashing. If that sounds like I am defining, and bashing AI for their lack of leadership, or at least representation - then let them chips fall where they may! It does get tiresome, year after year, doesn't it?

Every beloved USPAP class that I am FORCED to endure, I am tortured with the same old thing, (what's a client?) and it will be that way for the next million years, assuming someone with a brain doesn't come along and make real progress - or we will be left to our own devices to argue the finer points of our industry for all time immortal - alone...

 

[Meandering]

this rehashing of rehashing

poignant and simply eloquent concerning the issue.

.

 

[George Hatch]

People not understanding USPAP as a result of never reading the book is not the fault of the ASB.

And having spent a sizable portion of my adult life behind the podium teaching the course I can assure you that failure to read the first 33 pages of the book is by far the dominant reason for the number of appraisers who are "confused" about what they need in a basic appraisal assignment.

Call me cra-cra, but it's my assumption that the leadership at the AI are not among those who actually have problems understanding USPAP. And even of they were, they're in the business of selling QE and CE, so I'm a little surprised that they would think the process used to maintain and further refine USPAP was a problem to retire.

I'm trying to imagine the accounting profession or the architectural profession or the legal profession agitating to dismantle their respective standards boards.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

I'm trying to imagine where the idea that the AI's motivation is to scuttle USPAP came from. Marion threw that one out there and like so much she "throws" out there, it took on a life of its own.

To answer one of Marion's many questions (before she makes up another improbable and incorrect answer), changes in USPAP came about because of changes in the industry as she herself has alluded to.

 

[George Hatch]

And BTW, no matter who it is or what they call themselves wile they're doing it, there will always be people involved with establishing and promulgating what they think are appropriate minimums for these assignments and the people who complete them.

As well, there will always be people who complain about "boring, mundane, rehash" in one breath whilst complaining about "changes and hard to understand" in the next - as if the two levels of competency can possibly exist in the same individual at the same time.