What does it Mean to Protect the Public Trust

[Surf Cat]

So now what? What's the alternative for getting to "better"?

Riot!! Lol

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The actions of the individuals at the state board can be flawed without that being attributable to the origins, intent or content of USPAP.

Who do i trust most? A kangaroo court of my peers who have no legal training? Or a bonafide judge? The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Our board has improved but any action that gets overturned in a court is one too many and both OK and AR have had several overturned by a real judge. Never mind it costs the appraiser $50k or more to defend but the board has no obligation to pay for that- although one did have to pay $4,000 to an appraiser who also happened to be a lawyer...a lawyer that later was on the board.

Be the equivalent of me having to issue 100 revision requests for one of my appraisals then claiming how well written it was

And one thing a board will spank you for is having a series of revised reports in your work file. No matter the clown show that AMC reviews are.

The reason AOs aren't part of USPAP

They explicitly state in USPAP that they are used for "reference to appraisers, enforcement officials...."

 

[George Hatch]

Showing your reasoning on the one narrowly defined circumstance- and which doesn't necessarily fit any but that one circumstance and can't necessarily be applied anywhere else - is instructional and explanatory in nature. The derivative doesn't create new requirements. If it's a 1-2 violation that's what they're going to cite even if there's an AO with some similarities.

Would you not expect state officials to look for more understanding of the requirements in USPAP itself which represent the minimums?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Would you not expect state officials to look for more understanding of the requirements in USPAP itself which represent the minimums?

Understanding the inscrutable is a big part of the problem.

 

[George Hatch]

And yet you somehow expect judges to understand appraising better than appraisers. For judges to be immune from the same preconceived notions that many appraisers have. And i know what your going to say - the judges understand the law. And that's fine because all these states employ attorney's whose job it also is to understand how to read the law. So, "cant understand the law" isn't the excuse you seem to think it is.

 

[djd09]

misleading is intentional or not...do they have a FAQ for that...woke jokes

 

[Zoe]

We all know the phrase - it's the first sentence of the Preamble to USPAP. I've long been told that it is appraisers' responsibility to uphold the public trust. That's not what the document says, though... it says the purpose of USPAP is to promote public trust. Slight difference IMO... nonetheless, I've even been known to preach the mantra that appraisers uphold public trust by providing credible appraisal services. After much thought, however, I'm not sure we do. Who is 'public' anyway? Users of our services? Public in general? Well, public in general barely know what an appraisal is - much less what USPAP is, so it can't be them. What about users of our services? Is that 'the public'? In my mind it has to be - which means we are (in theory), through adherence to USPAP, maintaining the trust of the fat cats who have stock in/or own banks, CU's, etc., and the overlords at F/F/FHA/VA. But..... it should be obvious to even the casual observer that even they don't trust us. It is no longer sufficient to make a statement or an opinion in relation to our expertise - that statement or opinion (regardless of how obvious it may be - will be questioned and documentation will be required to verify said statement(s). So, then, our services - even when rendered in a manner that is meaningful and not misleading (by some) - are not trusted. Which begs the question: Why is that? Why don't the users of our services trust our opinions and conclusions? IMO - because many of us either aren't capable of, or fail to, provide services in a manner that is meaningful and not misleading. Can that perception be changed? I'm afraid not at this point in the game.

It means steal all you can in the process and don't disclose it on truth in lending disclosures.

 

[George Hatch]

I find it ironic that the same appraisers who repeatedly claim that appraisers were never a significant contributing factor to the losses in the last RE bust will also perform an Olympic-qualifying 180* double reverse backflip on the inspection issue and shriek that whatever the margin is between a PDC vs appraiser inspection will result in catastrophic harm to the general economy.

WRT consistency in the reasoning we can't have it both ways. The appraiser is looking at the pics and can see as much about the subject as they can about any of the comps that they're selecting as being most similar. Either what the appraiser cannot see in the subject pics is so critical to the lender's mortgage decision that missing it poses a threat to safe/sound lending in the macro or it isn't.

--------------
It goes without saying that WE know that less is always less and that WE think getting that much closer to the real MV fully justifies the additional effort on our part. But we're in the appraisal business, not the lending business. We think the value of the collateral plays a much larger role in the loan decision than has actually been the case. And whether they're right or wrong about it, some of these lenders think that particular less-is-less is an acceptable risk - for certain deals. Acceptable to them even though its not acceptable to us.

 

[chad hampton]

It has nothing to do with acceptable risk, more reliable, credible, margins, etc. it’s not even about quickness. It’s about having the AMC keep 500 on every order and only pay out 200. All the other nonsense is smoke and mirrors. Been clear from day 1 that’s what this is about.

I know why the one guy on here spews his nonsense. What doesn’t make sense is why other supposed working appraisers do.

 

[ucbruin]

I like AMCs, because I'm an introvert....
And I have zero "marketing" skills....