The Premier Online Community for Real Estate Appraisers!
-
Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online
community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.
USPAP class for the thirteenth time
- Thread starter djd09
- Start date
George Hatch
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- California
If your argument is that every single transaction should be backed by a conventional 1004 regardless of the LTV then I'll take that at face value. If Congress enacts such a law we can refer to it as "The Appraiser Full Employment Act", at which point our ascension to the status of "Extra Special Interest Group" will finally be complete.
It will be glorious. You'll still be mad about the existence of their additional user-driven requirements and expectations, though. You apparently believe they work for you instead of the other way around.
It will be glorious. You'll still be mad about the existence of their additional user-driven requirements and expectations, though. You apparently believe they work for you instead of the other way around.
Mejappz
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2005
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Florida
I'm looking for the fastest and least painful way to put this trash behind me. Zoom and on Demand are both options on the table. The damage TAF has inflicted on small businesses is in the millions.
Terrel L. Shields
Elite Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- Arkansas
5 years - so why not make them match. And why does anyone think we will have some great insight on a sale that occurred several years ago? LIke do we know the people? Is their phone number available. Are they even alive?
George Hatch
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- California
Their money, their choice. Same as it always is with every client of any type. That which they are not prohibited from doing is otherwise legally permissible. Even if it is unwise.no it is better now...the scum bag mortgage broker estimates the value with the unethical stakeholders blessing...no more low appraisals
How does it feel to understand that Fannie apparently thinks you are no more reliable than their AVM?
George Hatch
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- California
The main usage of that time frame is that the value from a couple years ago might *relate* to some extent to the current value despite often being different.
We always relate that question to lower previous price vs current appraised value but sometimes it can be the other way around - it previously sold for more but now the appraiser is valuing it lower. It was previously listed for less but sold for more. The question that arises by such a comparison isn't unreasonable to ask nor unreasonable to expect the appraiser to answer.
I run into it on the regular; sold for less back then but is now worth way more (usually as a result of improvements or occupancy changes). They would have seen the prior sale in their due diligence anyway, and that would have prompted the question anyway. Besides, if I'm working in good faith then don't I want to consider the issue anyway, just to square up my own opinions and conclusions?
I'm still waiting for a response to my question at to the cost to the appraiser of not simply ignoring all listings and sales. Have you got one or not?
Terrel L. Shields
Elite Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- Arkansas
So, every appraisal done previously was badly flawed and less accurate than before? Didn't we still comment on unusual history events anyway? Was there a carnival of crime trying to hide all those flips?
George Hatch
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- California
The question I'm asking is about the appraiser's damages. The oh-so-onerous burden that these standards - above and beyond what would otherwise still exist if these standards were retired and the govt got out of the business of regulating the lender's usage of appraisals.
What harm or infringement on appraiser profitability do you think this sales history requirement adding? USPAP doesn't even require verification protocols of any sort or an extensive analysis of that prior sale or transfer. You've been making noise for years about evals being more profitable to perform than an appraisal using the same SOW and TBH I'm just not seeing even $20 worth of difference between the two in terms of the appraiser's time/effort.
IRL, most of the time there isn't anything in the sales history that's recent. But if there is something recent should the appraiser be required to at least take a look or should that requirement be omitted as an appraisal standard, and leave it to the user to be smart enough to require it on their end? (which some of them will be that well-versed in what they're doing and some won't)
"If I had known this property was appraised for 20% more than the listing which had expired 3 months ago despite being exposed to the market for a year, I wouldn't have purchased at this price." Now maybe that claim is true and maybe it isn't but either way, what's the appraiser's defense for that complaint - that you never asked? As opposed to the appraiser always catching that situation up front because they always look whether the client is smart enough to ask that question or not.
There will be certain assignment types for certain non-lender users where the sales history is wholly immaterial to what they're doing. so, saying the sales history therefore shouldn't be a minimum requirement for ALL appraisals would make some sense there. But those aren't the types of assignments that the "USPAP requires too much" appraisers are doing in the first place. They just object to the concept of a uniform standard on general principle and due to their overall oppositional defiance oriented personalities.
What harm or infringement on appraiser profitability do you think this sales history requirement adding? USPAP doesn't even require verification protocols of any sort or an extensive analysis of that prior sale or transfer. You've been making noise for years about evals being more profitable to perform than an appraisal using the same SOW and TBH I'm just not seeing even $20 worth of difference between the two in terms of the appraiser's time/effort.
IRL, most of the time there isn't anything in the sales history that's recent. But if there is something recent should the appraiser be required to at least take a look or should that requirement be omitted as an appraisal standard, and leave it to the user to be smart enough to require it on their end? (which some of them will be that well-versed in what they're doing and some won't)
"If I had known this property was appraised for 20% more than the listing which had expired 3 months ago despite being exposed to the market for a year, I wouldn't have purchased at this price." Now maybe that claim is true and maybe it isn't but either way, what's the appraiser's defense for that complaint - that you never asked? As opposed to the appraiser always catching that situation up front because they always look whether the client is smart enough to ask that question or not.
There will be certain assignment types for certain non-lender users where the sales history is wholly immaterial to what they're doing. so, saying the sales history therefore shouldn't be a minimum requirement for ALL appraisals would make some sense there. But those aren't the types of assignments that the "USPAP requires too much" appraisers are doing in the first place. They just object to the concept of a uniform standard on general principle and due to their overall oppositional defiance oriented personalities.
Last edited: