Three days of hearings on my same complaints again. I have questions?

[Smokey Bear]

If I am one that will kick a sleeping bear to see if it is alive.

Watch out for those bears, Ray. Grouchy bears don't like being woken up.

 

[Brian Weaver]

Here's what happens in Illinois:

Once an appraiser opts for a Formal Hearing, a Standard 3 Review must be completed and provided in discovery. I do all of the Standard 3's. I always identify the controlling version of USPAP. However, as you know, many of the Standards in 1 & 2 haven't changed much from one year to the next. An ALJ (in Illinois - an Administrative Law Judge) might rule against using the wrong USPAP version...but this depends upon the judge. It always depends.
In Illinois, we have in-house prosecution. We do not use the AG. Typically, an AG hates to lose a case. Any case. In-house prosecution doesn't operate under a need to have a high conviction record. We don't convict people...we discipline a license. A subtle distinction...but a distinction.
Even after the ALJ renders an opinion some months after a Formal; the Appraisal Board can disregard any or all of it. That's Administrative Law. The Board is the jury pool and ultimately the only judge that matters. But that's here. They don't even need to be at the hearing. They can read the transcripts and figure it out later.
I never attack value. I don't care about value. However...if your way to the value was flawed...your value will fall apart of its own accord, won't it?
We prosecute based upon USPAP, the Act and the Admin Rules. That's it. Fannie, Freddie, FHA...we couldn't care less.
As for the magnitude of the mistakes...once you go to a Formal; the gloves are off and our prosecutor will nail you to the wall as hard as possible. That's why we prefer Settlement Conferences over Formals.
As for all of these various and sundry issues regarding what is and what is not in USPAP; your attorney should be able to dismantle many of these when he or she puts on his/her case in chief. That's what lawyers are for.
In Illinois, we are very prepared for the Formals. Unfortunately for most licensees...they end up bringing a knife to a gun fight.

 

[Ray Miller]

Ray:

Let's go back to the beginning.....

How is it that you came under the scrutiny of the State Appraisal Board?

Who made the initial complaint?

What was the nature of the complaint?

Was anyone "hurt" as a result of using your appraisals?

Have you ever been investigated before? If so, what was the nature/outcome of that/those investigations?

Ray:

Let's go back to the beginning.....

How is it that you came under the scrutiny of the State Appraisal Board?

Over the course of several years I have had a number of complaints filed against me for pressing the issue of lenders paying for an appraisal. If I refuse to roll over and not collect as I feel many do when the lender, MB, LO, Homeowner says they will file a complaint wit the board. I gave them the boards address and phone number at that time thinking the board played fair. Several of the complaints are anonymous according to the board. These four were over payment issues.

It is a tool I feel the LO, MB has been using quite effetely against appraisers for a number of years and works well for them in most case. Unless they come up against a hard nose ole herd bull with moss growing on it back.

Who made the initial complaint?

Hard to say.

What was the nature of the complaint?

Poor work on the interm appraisal. Remember I submitted a corrected appraisal on each one, but would not roll over on the fees for payment when the required number was not hit.

Was anyone "hurt" as a result of using your appraisals?

Not to my knowledge and we proved that in the hearings a year ago. None of the review appraisers had a problem with value. On two of the review cover letters they even stated that had no problem with value and agreed with my value.

Have you ever been investigated before? If so, what was the nature/outcome of that/those investigations?

Yes, many times I have been ask to send in work files. I will not go into detail about why 3 of the original appraisal in this complaint went out with problems as we have presented those reason to the state. But at that time I was having some problems that have now been address and corrected.

I have even sent in additional requested reports to the state and I guess no problems were found. As none have been address yet. I have sent in several roosters.

But I feel part of the kicker to this is I sent in reports and rosters to be ABQ certified and the state says I did to many appraisal in to short a time and they would not certified me as ABQ certified. So at this point after four or five years I am still not ABQ certified, yet being held to the ABQ requiredments. How can a person be held to a standard that you are not certified to? By the way Wisconsin does not require any of license or certification to appraise non FRT real estate loans or property that is not for an FRT Loan. So I can appraise anything as long as I don’t represent my self as a license appraiser for that report. Makes no difference of the value.

 

[Midwest Guy]

Have you read USPAP FAQ. My quote was not from FNMA. :icon_idea:

Just a point of clarification.

Ray says the allegation is that the absence of the CA violates law and USPAP - not that it violates something Fannie said.

 

[Ray Miller]

Don't want to put you on the spot here as I do learn from many of your postings and very inforative information.

Here's what happens in Illinois:

Once an appraiser opts for a Formal Hearing, a Standard 3 Review must be completed and provided in discovery. I do all of the Standard 3's. I always identify the controlling version of USPAP. However, as you know, many of the Standards in 1 & 2 haven't changed much from one year to the next. An ALJ (in Illinois - an Administrative Law Judge) might rule against using the wrong USPAP version...but this depends upon the judge. It always depends.
In Illinois, we have in-house prosecution. We do not use the AG. Typically, an AG hates to lose a case. Any case. In-house prosecution doesn't operate under a need to have a high conviction record. We don't convict people...we discipline a license. A subtle distinction...but a distinction.
Even after the ALJ renders an opinion some months after a Formal; the Appraisal Board can disregard any or all of it. That's Administrative Law. The Board is the jury pool and ultimately the only judge that matters. But that's here. They don't even need to be at the hearing. They can read the transcripts and figure it out later.
I never attack value. I don't care about value. However...if your way to the value was flawed...your value will fall apart of its own accord, won't it?
We prosecute based upon USPAP, the Act and the Admin Rules. That's it. Fannie, Freddie, FHA...we couldn't care less.
As for the magnitude of the mistakes...once you go to a Formal; the gloves are off and our prosecutor will nail you to the wall as hard as possible. That's why we prefer Settlement Conferences over Formals.
As for all of these various and sundry issues regarding what is and what is not in USPAP; your attorney should be able to dismantle many of these when he or she puts on his/her case in chief. That's what lawyers are for.
In Illinois, we are very prepared for the Formals. Unfortunately for most licensees...they end up bringing a knife to a gun fight.

Here's what happens in Illinois:

Once an appraiser opts for a Formal Hearing, a Standard 3 Review must be completed and provided in discovery. I do all of the Standard 3's. I always identify the controlling version of USPAP. However, as you know, many of the Standards in 1 & 2 haven't changed much from one year to the next. An ALJ (in Illinois - an Administrative Law Judge) might rule against using the wrong USPAP version...but this depends upon the judge. It always depends.

But should not a reviewer know what controlling version is used? For the simple fact the expert is an expert and reviewing the entire report not just what is in Standards one and two?

I think this would show that the review could have flaws an in a case where ones license is at stake carries a lot of weight that the reviewer may will be incompetent as well.

In Illinois, we have in-house prosecution. We do not use the AG. Typically, an AG hates to lose a case. Why?

Any case. In-house prosecution doesn't operate under a need to have a high conviction record. We don't convict people...we discipline a license. A subtle distinction...but a distinction.

I think as it should be.

Even after the ALJ renders an opinion some months after a Formal; the Appraisal Board can disregard any or all of it. That's Administrative Law. The Board is the jury pool and ultimately the only judge that matters. But that's here. They don't even need to be at the hearing. They can read the transcripts and figure it out later.

As I understand same for Wisconsin.


I never attack value. I don't care about value. However...if your way to the value was flawed...your value will fall apart of its own accord, won't it?

My values stood at least according to those that made statements in their reviews that there was no problem with my value. If I remember correctly that all comment on the values and had no problem with them

We prosecute based upon USPAP, the Act and the Admin Rules. That's it. Fannie, Freddie, FHA...we couldn't care less.

I think as well as it should be. But in these hearings both times Fannie, Freddie, FHA, FIRRIA and others were brought up by the reviewers. Again would this not show that they did not under the review process under USPAP and were confusing USPAP with other standards or rules?

As for the magnitude of the mistakes...once you go to a Formal; the gloves are off and our prosecutor will nail you to the wall as hard as possible. That's why we prefer Settlement Conferences over Formals.

I would agree, but here in Wisconsin it appears that settlement conferences the out come is not same. The sanctions are much more server even if you prove the majority of the states case was wrong. Settlement conferences are in some case harsh. Sometimes I feel beyond reasons. If you review Wisconsin history of settlements.

As for all of these various and sundry issues regarding what is and what is not in USPAP; your attorney should be able to dismantle many of these when he or she puts on his/her case in chief. That's what lawyers are for.

That is what was done before and that is what he did do this time. It also showed that the reviewers were incompetent in their reviews and incompetent in their understanding of USPAP and confused between the law, USPAP, FANNIE, FREEDEI and FIRRIEA.

In Illinois, we are very prepared for the Formals. Unfortunately for most licensees...they end up bringing a knife to a gun fight.

Never want to just bring a knife to a war. I believe in bring a “Battle Group” or at least a Division. The state has just to much money to waste and to much man power.

As a matter of fact the ALJ ask or ordered the AG to submit briefs on four points of law that the reviewers claimed were law.

I also respect your appearing here using what I assume is your real name.

 

[Midwest Guy]

Brian,

Thank you, well all learn from your posts. It is my understanding that some state boards are not prepared for court challenges and lose appeals.

Here's what happens in Illinois:

In Illinois, we are very prepared for the Formals. Unfortunately for most licensees...they end up bringing a knife to a gun fight.

 

[Doug Wegener]

Out to get you

Three days of Hearings

Please understand that these are my feelings and the way I see that things went.

Before I get started let me say I know that the state and federal agencies monitor this forum and pull postings and data from the form as evidence by the State of Wisconsin Jr. Attorney General entering one of my posting as an exhibit in my hearing yesterday. I will always stand behind what I post, unless I learn that I was incorrect. I am by no means perfect, but I do have the where with all to post using my real name and stand behind what I post. I have a great fear of government and those people who work for government who are afraid to let their real names be known.

I just finished up three days of hearings again on the original complaints that were filed against me several years ago. Yes, I have admitted that there were some mistakes in my reports, but none affected the finial conclusion of value of the subject property.

The State of Wisconsin had four new expert witnesses one for each of the reports. I Have no clue as to why they chose new experts over the original experts they had in the first hearing. However that in many, many cases and items in the reports the new experts disagreed with the original expert’s conclusions. So we had to answer a whole new set of questions about the reports. So we have two sets of experts disagreeing with each other over what is wrong with the reports.

I am going to post some things that I gather from the three days and the the state experts said and attested too. Also how their reviews were conducted.

I would very much like your input on this matter for some reasons of my own as it will help me make some decision to proceed in this matter.

So here goes.

One out of the four reports was the finial version of the report that was sent to the lender, the other three were not the final corrected report that were reviewed. So three of the reviewers never reviewed the finial report the lender received nor were they presented by the state to the court.

This is what I felt was said and the way I interpreted things.

1. The finial conclusion was an issue in one of the reports only and that reviewer did not provide any support for his value other then the fact there were a number of sales that could have been used for comparables even though they were not A-Frames.

2. That it makes no difference if an error or errors are found regardless of the magnitude of the error (minor to major) and you are contactdc by the receipt of the report about the problems and submit a corrected report. You are still labial for prosecution because you sent out a report with errors in it. The state can take the interim or first report and act on it. By the way the value was the same on all the corrected reports as it was on the first one received.

3. That a reviewer can present their conclusion of the report with out any statements, supporting documents or reasons in the report to support why they reach the conclusions they did. Except for the fact it violated such and such a provision of USPAP.

4. An expert reviewer can review your report under the wrong standards of USPAP. In other words one of my reports should have been reviewed under the 2005 USPAP and the reviewer used 2006 and gave three hours of testimony using the 2006 USPAP. Should his testimony stand, should I file a complaint?

5. The state attacked my geographic competency in the area I covered because it was a large rural area that I specialized in. Regardless of the number of data bases I have and the way I collect and keep data. it is a voliation of USPAP.

6. That you are limited in the number of appraisal you do. That if the expert only does 200 to 300 reports a year and has superior license and schooling. You should do a substantial less number of appraisals then the four or five hundred you may have done for the simple fact that it should take you longer to complete the report because of your education and license level.

7. That you can not have a signature line that says: Miller Land & Livestock, Co. AP. Lic # xxxx-zzz. That the words Appraiser License must be spelled out.

8. That a reviewer can state that the form was incorrect that I used, because he felt that the subject was a single family attached duplex. That because the legal description did not have the words condo in it. It should not be done on a condo form. We proved that the subject had a 0 lot line conversion in place, was being change from a rental development in to condo ownership, had been listed and sold as a condo twice before I did the appraisal on it. That I should not have used condo comparables but single family home or multi unit homes. We presented these documents into evidence and the record. That this reviewer failed to research the data on the subject and in my appraisal. The reviewer presented nothing to support his claims it was single family attached.

9. It is against USPAP and the LAW to use MLS photos in an appraisal report. This was presented by one of the reviewers. The same one that used the wrong USPAP Standard for review.

10. The reviewer sited you must site the source of your market value even if you use the preprinted Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac forms. You must site a source if not, you have violated USPAP.

11. One reviewer stated you must used comparable in the township if there are a large number of sale, regardless if they are like the subject in design or not. Case in point there was 30 plus sale in this area of ranch type homes with the similar GLA as the subject. However the subject was an A Frame and I went 6 miles and up to find A Frame comparables. I had a total of 5 A-Frames as comparables. He stated I should have use ranch type homes. Because for the simple fact there were no A-Frame sales nearer in the small rural town. This violated USPAP by going a greater distance to find them.

12. One of the reviewers said it is against the LAW and a violation of USPAP if you do not use the Cost Approach in your reports. It is also against the LAW and USPAP if at a later date you add the Cost Approach at the request of the lender and charge for the work, because it should have been include from the start.

13. One of the reviewers the same one above in 12 did a review of my report that was multi parcel and showed that in the report by the legal and title documents. Only the reviewer based his review on one of the parcels and faulted my report because I used the entire 4.5 acres two parcels that I was placing a value on and not just the 1.5 acres that the home sit on. He never once mentions the additional parcel or the additional acreage in his review of my work. That I was in violation of USPAP for using the 4.5 acres. The reviewer I must assume had a copy of my appraisal and the state had a copy of the order showing a request for the 4.5 acres and they had the data from the county or he could have obtain the datat from the county. Should a complaint be filed because he failed to research the subject and only reviewed using the 1.5 acres.

14. The invoice is again part of the work file and should be included as to what rates you charge your clients in a request for your work file. Again the number of hours I worked entered into the picture as well.

. Here is the kicker, the AG stop the proceedings and ask to amend the complaint near the end of my redirect yesterday after more then 2 ½ days, where I made the statement that in 2005 into early 2007, I had a staff that typed part of my reports, help me to gather data of sales, rents in the area I cover, in addition to information on the subject property such as legal, flood plane data and such. That if I did not included each and every ones name that help gather that data and any that help type any part of the report. I was in violation of USPAP. The judge did not allow him to amend the complaint, but it was my under standing he was going to protest the judges ruling and file additional complaints on all my reports for not having that in the report. I in open court and on the record, state that if the AG amended the complaint to include this and or filed new complaints, I would file a blanket complaint on all appraisers in Wisconsin who had and office and staff that helped in preparing appraisal reports. How would you have handled this statement from the AG?

There were many more things that each of the reviews brought up that they said were violations of USPAP that should not even enter into USPAP, but they were represent too by the reviewers.

There were many other things in the hearings that were presented and my attorney did a an excellent job of countering and asking where in USPAP did that apply. Most of the time they could not answer where in USPAP it was.

I felt that not one of the reviewers fully reviewed my work, researched the subject and presented a creditable review considering all the errors that we were able to present to the court in their reviews.

What do you think.

Sounds like they are out to get you and that you are actually a good appraiser.

Its hard to do the perfect appraisal especially under the time limits we are usually working under.

I have a saying that if you go to court then you lose even if you win. The hassle and expense make any victory hollow at best.

Its a bit like fighting the IRS, you generally can't win and they can make your life miserable.

All that being said, I do have a point or two.

Generally, most states fail in one area or another in providing adequate due process in one way or another. I do not know the laws of your state but are you being provided the due
process that is guaranteed you under both the Federal and State Constitutions? If not, any decisions they make can be attacked on that grounds.

Good luck.

 

[athome77]

Brian Weaver,


I thoroughly enjoy your input on this forum as it helps to explain what goes on from the enforcement side of things, at least in Illinois.

As an Illinos appraiser I am glad to say that I never have, and hopefully never will, have to appear in front of the board. That being said, if I ever do have to appear, I promise not to bring a knife with me (lol).

 

[JSmith43]

Ray, I agree with the sunshine crowd in this instance. Normally good legal advice to keep public comments to a minimum is only a rule of thumb.

This situation deserves public scrutiny. Otherwise, they will do what they want to you and to those that follow in your footsteps.

You should write a book. The story line is clear. Rough around the edges, street smart cowboy tries to get paid for work done, stand his ground on principle and gets filleted on USPAP technicalities, many of which are made up. This is a hideous travesty that deserves to be politicized and tried in a populist court, with the real rascals decommissioned and their political allies voted out of office.

Simple as that. Wisconsin deserves national attention for not cleaning up this miss themselves.

 

[sbb04]

A couple of observations. I wonder if the expost facto interpretation of what USPAP is used also applies to reviews?
As to photos USPAP doesn't even require photos. These guys obviously making it up as they go along. I'd file complaints against the reviewers. If all of this is true then they should have any and all licenses of theirs revoked.