Marcia Langley
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Missouri
Ken,
Yes, I do see what you mean. Cost to any of the parties is an important issue whether it is cost to appraisers, clients, or boards. And efficiencies are also important issues for all of those parties.
I fully understand that the needs of commerce for speed and profit must be address (and will be strenuously addressed by the rich lobbies).
But I also feel that there are some elementary safeguards that must be satisfied first before the commercial interests can be considered.
I have no idea but I do know that some basic things must be achieved regardless of their cost, like protecting the public trust.
And appraisers have been abused enough by being compromised and limited in their ability to adhere to USPAP. At some point in the advance of technology, the potential for abuse of the public trust has to be considered on a par with actually discovered abuses.
Frankly, from the truly blatent abuses that actually do find their way into a courtroom, I feel certain that there are thousands more that never see the light of day.
But, if nothing else, Mr. Olsen's assertion that what he receives is the true copy of what the appraiser should be held responsible for is putting us all on notice that his company would use all the power of all those rich lobbies to prosecute an appraiser if a discrepancy were to occur. The gauntlet has been laid.
Yes, I do see what you mean. Cost to any of the parties is an important issue whether it is cost to appraisers, clients, or boards. And efficiencies are also important issues for all of those parties.
I fully understand that the needs of commerce for speed and profit must be address (and will be strenuously addressed by the rich lobbies).
But I also feel that there are some elementary safeguards that must be satisfied first before the commercial interests can be considered.
I have no idea but I do know that some basic things must be achieved regardless of their cost, like protecting the public trust.
And appraisers have been abused enough by being compromised and limited in their ability to adhere to USPAP. At some point in the advance of technology, the potential for abuse of the public trust has to be considered on a par with actually discovered abuses.
Frankly, from the truly blatent abuses that actually do find their way into a courtroom, I feel certain that there are thousands more that never see the light of day.
But, if nothing else, Mr. Olsen's assertion that what he receives is the true copy of what the appraiser should be held responsible for is putting us all on notice that his company would use all the power of all those rich lobbies to prosecute an appraiser if a discrepancy were to occur. The gauntlet has been laid.
