U.s. Regulators Ready To Ease Check On Property Values

[Joe Flacco]

Nobody is impressed by a USPAP instructor title. Trust me.

 

[George Hatch]

1) My work is way more complicated than your work. You know how to appraise one property type (and I'm sure you do it well); but I have to know how to appraise most all of them.

2) And yet, I've know lots of competent CGs over the last 30 years who never completed college and some of them never even set foot on a college campus. Which after all, is the primary point in a discussion of what it actually takes to become competent.

3) If the AQB were to drop the college requirements for a CG it wouldn't impact my competition, and the reason I know that is because of the track record we established for the 15 years of licensing that preceded the 2008 bump in CG qualifications. We didn't blow up our own well by taking on massive numbers of trainees, which is the primary reason we never got grossly oversupplied. The number of CGs in 2009 (our most recent high point) was 10% LOWER than the number in 2000, not 100% higher as was the case for you guys. We're currently 6.5% lower than our 2009 high spot and 16% lower than our 2000 number. We had what you guys didn't have - self restraint.

 

[George Hatch]

Nobody is impressed by a USPAP instructor title. Trust me.

Uhhh, I am not a USPAP Instructor. I let my qualifications lapse a few years back because I didn't have any further use for it.

Whatever my standing is on this forum I had already established it prior to the AQB establishing their Instructor's course. For better or worse it's always been my writing that has resonated with people, not any form of title or status. There are current USPAP Instructors on this forum but they don't attract attention based on that qualification; they attract attention based on their understanding of the material.

 

[Joe Flacco]

1) My work is way more complicated than your work. You know how to appraise one property type (and I'm sure you do it well); but I have to know how to appraise most all of them.

2) And yet, I've know lots of competent CGs over the last 30 years who never completed college and some of them never even set foot on a college campus. Which after all, is the primary point in a discussion of what it actually takes to become competent.

3) If the AQB were to drop the college requirements for a CG it wouldn't impact my competition, and the reason I know that is because of the track record we established for the 15 years of licensing that preceded the 2008 bump in CG qualifications. We didn't blow up our own well by taking on massive numbers of trainees, which is the primary reason we never got grossly oversupplied. The number of CGs in 2009 (our most recent high point) was 10% LOWER than the number in 2000, not 100% higher as was the case for you guys. We're currently 6.5% lower than our 2009 high spot and 16% lower than our 2000 number. We had what you guys didn't have - self restraint.

1) I'm not impressed with how complicated your work is. Like you say appraisal is not rocket science.

2) You can't say it was self-restraint when the qualifications were not the same. If the qualifications are the same then you would probably have a bunch of moron commercial appraisers without self restraint.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

ABA has long supported an increase to the CRE appraisal threshold, noting in previous comments that doing so would provide immediate relief to banks that are currently struggling with a shortage of certified appraisers -- particularly in rural areas -- and long appraisal turnaround times

My wonder is perhaps this will do exactly the opposite. Why service a rural bank with short turn times and low fees...the real unspoken reason they want relief. I never heard a rural bank complain about 3 week turn times from 1992 - 2007, or maybe even 2010. Then suddenly it was 5 day turn times for $245 thru a terrible bid system that wastes at least one more day. Why should anyone want to do a farm, 40 acres and a house, or many of the complex assignments rural banks often engender. Think of the things rural banks have asked me to appraise over the years. A small feed mill miles from a town. An old school house converted to a dwelling. A triple 4plex apartment in a town where that was the only such animal in existence within 20 miles. 40 acres with a barn converted to a house. Not one, but two different homes used for foster children and designed for such with oversized dining rooms, multiple bedrooms, etc. Both being about 10 miles from the nearest town of 800 souls. These are hard in an urban situation. Much harder in rural. They take time to do it right. Why the impatience? Was never mentioned in the 90s and well into this century. So why do they think they need instant gratification? I doubt I've ever got an offer and acceptance in my life that wasn't at least 10 days old. They could order these the same day they order the credit report and title work.

how much more complex the work I do is than what you do

For me, a 1004 with all the attendant issues FHA or Fannie requires means I would much rather tackle a commercial project with only one standard (USPAP) to comply with. I tip my hat to those who can do a residential appraisal consistently for these parties without major stips.

it's the ability to learn the material in the Income Capitalization course

I never was a good math student and it took a lot of study and applying myself to the process. I took an income course that was very rudimentary. I took another, hardly more advanced. I took a 12C class that was taught by a very smart man who knew it well but was not a great teacher. And then took an appraisal math class by an excellent teacher who really helped me more than all before his class. And I took that same person for the pre-test prep class, and passed the CG with a higher score than I did with the CR test. But being out of college for 20 years meant i basically had to relearn all the statistics and basics I had not used since. And I did a lot of study on my own. It always surprises me to find appraisers who own not one real textbook outside USPAP except was provided to them by a class.

 

[Joe Flacco]

Uhhh, I am not a USPAP Instructor. I let my qualifications lapse a few years back because I didn't have any further use for it.

Whatever my standing is on this forum I had already established it prior to the AQB establishing their Instructor's course. For better or worse it's always been my writing that has resonated with people, not any form of title or status. There are current USPAP Instructors on this forum but they don't attract attention based on that qualification; they attract attention based on their understanding of the material.

Resonated with who?

You are not somebody bro.

 

[Joe Flacco]

Danny Wiley is somebody. He is a player. Even Joan Trice is a player. You?

 

[George Hatch]

1) I'm not impressed with how complicated your work is. Like you say appraisal is not rocket science.

2) You can't say it was self-restraint when the qualifications were not the same. If the qualifications are the same then you would probably have a bunch of moron commercial appraisers without self restraint.

Lemme attempt to reason with you one more time:

1) "Complicated" only has meaning when used in context or comparison to something else. "Complex" compared to what? My original comment was that my work is way more complicated than your work. I can say that from experience because I've done both for many years.

This is a discussion about what it does and doesn't take to become competent at appraising, originally for SFR licensing but now we're talking about the CGs; so I expressed my opinion on that as well. Again, from personal experience the types of which you do not have. You literally do not know what you don't know on this one.

2) There were no college requirements for CG licenses between 1992-2008. The actual conduct of the CGs WRT trainees during that time period is just as much a known quantity as the conduct of the SL/CRs during the same time frame. IRL the two groups acted differently.

3) While I can agree that appraisers need certain fundamental skills and aptitudes, and that establishing some minimums beyond a HS diploma or GED are appropriate to ensure a minimum qualification level for the group as a whole, I always thought the 2008 requirements (certain specific courses at the college level for the certified appraisers) was sufficient, which is all a minimum qualification to get to competent practice needs to be.

The profession has never really tested the efficacy of that interim level of qualifications criteria to any degree, so the jump to 4-yr degrees for CRs and CGs was not based on anyone actually knowing it was necessary. If anything, the appeal to vanity seems to be second only to the appeal to competition control. Which, as the CGs have ALWAYS demonstrated, is a matter that could have been handled in the market by the practitioners if they were so motivated to do that.

Its not the CGs fault that the SL/CR appraisers (as a group) were too short sighted about the inevitable results of taking on too many trainees, and nobody forced them to do that. They didn't have to do that, as evidenced by the fact that the CGs actually were smart enough not to do that.

I was telling you guys 20 years ago to be mindful about not taking on too many trainees. Some of the old timers listened, and some of them didn't listen, which is why we now have a bunch of 2003-2009 appraisers who apparently don't realize that they are part of the oversupply that has killed their fees, and that if their supervisors had been more judicious they wouldn't even be here to complain about fees.

 

[George Hatch]

Resonated with who?

You are not somebody bro.

On this forum nobody prevails by status. It is only by how well the reasoning does and doesn't makes sense to people that matters. Same as with appraising. If i was a genius for the last 30 years but I do the donkey on the assignment I'm working on today then that's what I am today.


So do you want to talk about the topic of the thread or do you want to talk about me? I'd rather talk about the topic of the thread.

 

[Meandering]

Actually, this part is not correct.

2) There were no college requirements for CG licenses between 1992-2008. The actual conduct of the CGs WRT trainees during that time period is just as much a known quantity as the conduct of the SL/CRs during the same time frame. IRL the two groups acted differently.

The college requirement was for credit hours in specific classes came into effect in the 2000s. I got my CG in 2006 and had to pick up two additional classes to meet the college work requirement. I still don't have a degree, but I do have credits, but why pay the extra money for the "degree" and graduation, when it doesn't translate into additional dollars, and you don't really have a need to have a degree to wave in the face of other people?

"The degree" should never be the benchmark.

"The degree" contains too much course work in crap to make you a "well-rounded" student.

If you wanted to be the mathematician in support of rocket scientists, paying the $s and time for mandatory art history classes, only works when Daddy is buying your "degree" for you.

.