USPAP : Why is a "Rule" different than a "Standard"?

[Mark K]

That would be FUSPAP

No, that would be FUBAR.

 

[Ariba]

I disagree. USPAP has been a complete failure.

That is a little too extreme wouldn't you say?

 

[DWiley]

I need to understand somethng before I can understand it, so I often try to diagram a publication such as USPAP.

Section 1:
Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice
--comprised of 8 sections including 5 Rules

Section 2:
Standards and Standard Rules
--comprised of 10 Standards including 0 Rules

So....what is the difference between the Rules in Section 1 and the Rules in Section 2? And why is Section 2 described as "Rules" when the TofC doesn't describe any Rules?

My question is sincere and not a criticism of USPAP--referring to the Industry version rather than the Fernando version !!!!!!

George gave a VERY good answer. In the USPAP instructor material there is a comment that the Standards Rules are all elaborations of how the General Rules (ETHICS RULE, COMPETENCY RULE, SOW RULE, etc.) apply for certain assignment types and property types.

 

[DWiley]

I disagree. USPAP has been a complete failure.

You are certainly not the first to express that view However, I have been unable to get anyone with such a view to express how they would define "success" for USPAP. Since you think it is a failure, that implies that you have some notion of what would constitute "success" - can you share that?

 

[RCA]

George gave a VERY good answer. In the USPAP instructor material there is a comment that the Standards Rules are all elaborations of how the General Rules (ETHICS RULE, COMPETENCY RULE, SOW RULE, etc.) apply for certain assignment types and property types.

George should have said "General Rules" rather than just "Rules." So, it wasn't a so-called "very good" answer. George is just too familiar with USPAP, I suppose.

-- Unless you want to confuse readers. Which is a big problem with USPAP with all of its contradictions and duplication. It is at least 3 times larger than necessary. Probably 4 times.

Get in touch with reality. You are living in an illusion. The so-called "USPAP Illusion". IVS is worth reading.

 

[residentialguy]

George should have said "General Rules" rather than just "Rules." So, it wasn't a so-called "very good" answer. George is just too familiar with USPAP, I suppose.

-- Unless you want to confuse readers. Which is a big problem with USPAP with all of its contradictions and duplication. It is at least 3 times larger than necessary. Probably 4 times.

Get in touch with reality. You are living in an illusion. The so-called "USPAP Illusion". IVS is worth reading.

Please elaborate on and support your accusations. Thx

 

[DWiley]

George should have said "General Rules" rather than just "Rules." So, it wasn't a so-called "very good" answer. George is just too familiar with USPAP, I suppose.

-- Unless you want to confuse readers. Which is a big problem with USPAP with all of its contradictions and duplication. It is at least 3 times larger than necessary. Probably 4 times.

Get in touch with reality. You are living in an illusion. The so-called "USPAP Illusion". IVS is worth reading.

I guess it is fortunate for me that I have familiarity with the IVS, having served 6 years on their Standards Board as well.

 

[RCA]

I guess it is fortunate for me that I have familiarity with the IVS, having served 6 years on their Standards Board as well.

Well, congratulations. I HOPE you and other US appraisers on their Standards Board are NOT going to contaminate it with USPAP ideas --- any more than absolutely necessary.

Somewhere along the way, they got rid of most of the UK English spellings. That was nice.

 

[DWiley]

Well, congratulations. I HOPE you and other US appraisers on their Standards Board are NOT going to contaminate it with USPAP ideas --- any more than absolutely necessary.

"Served" = past tense

 

[RCA]

"Served" = past tense

It would be interesting to know what is happening inside that board. Politically.

I once compared the word count in UPSPA (Including the Advisory Opinions) to the IVS and I think it was over 3 times longer. Yet IVS has far more content, is far more specific and lacks contradictions. Of course USPAP glories in repetition. How many times can you say the same thing? USPAP would probably say (if it could answer): "At least 6 times."