Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[Workbox]

I find the venom in many of the posts in this thread hilarious, particularly when one post the proof someone was right in order to prove they were wrong. It's just too funny.

I keep saying the same thing. CP, It is no venom, just reality of what has happened. Unfortunately many still are happy with a boat on calm waters, but when they open their eyes, they are just getting off the Titanic. But prefer to to close their eyes and hope that it goes away.

 

[Jonsey]

I keep going back to when Zaio had their "ASB Insider", and as Ken V. would say, "Key Figures", that would have an inherent impact on the Appraiser or the Appraisal Profession. And many asked, Why the "Secrecy"? Well it became very evident why. For Money and maybe future rewards.

Yes, there are HUGE differences - the work I did for Zaio was done after I left the ASB, not while I was a sitting member - not while I was leading a committee investigating them, and not while I had filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against them. I charged an hourly rate, and my compensation did not hinge on the outcome of my report - another big difference.

DW,
Was that YOU Verret was referring too in those posts as Zaio's insider at the ASB? btw, When did you leave the ASB?

So, will Zaio and FNC's suits be at the meeting, again, in July.

 

[Rich Heyn]

DW,
Was that YOU Verret was referring too in those posts as Zaio's insider at the ASB? btw, When did you leave the ASB?

So, will Zaio and FNC's suits be at the meeting, again, in July.

Ken Verret was referring to the fact that Zaio is a member of the Industry Advisory Council. Workbox should know that; it's been discussed in other threads.

The IAC is composed of pretty much any Industry entity (Lenders, AMCs, Appraisal Companies, Appraisal Software Companies) that wants to join, pay the fee and attend the meetings. The IAC meetings which I have attended have been very edifying, but the degree of IAC's influence on the ASC or AQB is debatable. And I don't know what Zaio or their "insiders" (Workbox's term, I believe, not Ken Verrett's) has to do with this thread. It seems to have more to do with an ad hominem ad nauseam regarding Danny's consulting assignment for Zaio.

 

[Fred]

I keep going back to when Zaio had their "ASB Insider"

The next time you go back, get the quite right, not "altered," not "changed."

 

[Fred]

If you see faults in my report, I would be glad to hear them.

Does that go for me, too?

 

[George Hatch]

FWIW,

I happen to know for a fact that Zaio didn't contact Danny Wiley to perform their external review until after the beginning of 2007, by which time he had already left the ASB. Ken Verrett's comments about Zaio having the inside line at The Appraisal Foundation weren't made until after that. I believe it was several months after that, although I don't remember exactly when.

While we're on the subject, I can't think of anything the ASB has done to USPAP in the last 12 years I've been teaching it that stacks the deck in Zaio's favor. If you think about it, even if the ASB did reduce minimums to better enable the Z-process and their exagerrated marketing claims it would hurt Zaio - in short order - more than help them. IMO, the Z-model isn't feasible unless they can exploit the margin between what they say and what they do. No gap = no margin to exploit.

You guys may not agree with Danny's opinions on the AIRD or AppraisalPort issues - I don't entirely agree with some of those opinions either. But IMO that's no call for suggesting that he dorked USPAP for anyone's financial gain, including his own.

Show me one change that's been made to USPAP that provides Zaio or FNC with an undue advantage and I will eat my words. Other than that I'd ask for a more civil tone around here. There ain't no suits in this thread and we are not enemies of one another.

 

[DWiley]

Wiley, If I was getting crapped all over for someone else, I would be saying, "It's Not me, But them". Why take the abuse? why fall for someone else? Who are these, "Key Figures", why take their burden?

And why should I concern myself with conspiracy theories cooked up by people who apparently lack the skills to research basic facts. I have not been a member of the ASB since 2006, so how could I have been serving as a "Zaio insider" during the time of Mr. V's posts? You should read Clancy - his stories are far more believable.

I would have wagered a large sum of money that someone would divert the thread away from Mr. Turner's obvious conflict of interest as soon as possible. I was only suprised it took so long for an ad hominem to be thrown my way - I have become accustomed to it.

I ask you point blank, Mr. XXXXXX, do you think it is appropriate for Mr. Turner to cast an official vote or have any official role in this matter when he has pending litigation against FNC? An honest answer to that question is all I ask.

...I'm sorry that you think it is a joking matter to protect your neighbor

Failing to recuse one's self when there is such an obvious conflict is no joking matter. Pam may get her wish for that federal judge after all, but that judge may be deciding something other than the thing she is seeking.

 

[Workbox]

DW, I am not an Attorney, and can not speak for Mr. Turner, and do not read Clancy, not impressed with his work. I guess you fell into the wrong timing for what Z had set up. My apologies DW.

 

[Fred]

Steven,

I agree that any possible policy language will have to be very carefully written in order to accpmplish anything reasonable.

What is missing here, is what comes first, the identification of the problem. After that would be the proposal of a reasonable remedy. Careful writing is the last thing. Sometimes the absence of careful writing is caused by the absense of what comes first (a problem) and what comes next (a reasonable remedy).

I still think we need a guideline regarding the end point of the appraisers' responsibility. It has become blurred.

USPAP says I must be able to reproduce what I "sent," and that is already more than a guideline. It's not "blurred" for me.

 

[George Hatch]

I guess you fell into the wrong timing for what Z had set up. My apologies DW.

As far as I can tell, the Z-process has the same fundamental USPAP/Fannie problems now that it had in 2006. Whatever Zaio may or may not have managed to set up in the interim it hasn't solved any of these problems. Danny gave them several recommendations in his report that we know about, and I haven't seen any indication that Zaio has taken any of them.


Al, have you ever submitted a report to a client that they ended up ignoring?