WI board finding, most detailed I've seen

[Fred]

Steven, do you think there is anything that can be done about it?

No. The state board system is not going anywhere. I don't think the prevailing culture is going anywhere either.

I am willing to believe the report is insufficient - no intended use, user or effective date. Fine. But so often is seems like they are guilding the lily. The appraisal has three approaches - 94, 95 and 96 - and he didn't explain how he got to 95, other than to say equal weighting? Given those facts, how could it come to anything except 95?

 

[Fred Freund]

larryroscoe1 made the follwoing comment regarding listing the sales history:

"Like what? How the weather was on that day? USPAP doesn't say we have to report all the findings of our analysis, just that we MUST analyze the sales. Teh fact that the sale was reported IMO is the evidence of that analysis"

Just listing the prior sales in the report and the putting "No other sales in 36 months" in the space below the prior sales is one of my pet peeves when performing a review. That is NOT an analysis. An analysis would address what the prior sale price is AND how it relates to the current opinion of value. Is there a change in value from the prior sale? Is it consistent with market conditions? Was it a non-armslength sale? Was there work done on the property?

I just did a review on a report that shows 55% appreciation in an 18 month period from 2005 to 2007. No comments or discussion on how that happened in today's market. The boxes and text in the neighborhood section showed and described a stable market. IMHO, there was no analysis of the prior sale. He looked up and reported the sale price but apparently, it made no impression on him. Didn't have anything to do with this report.

 

[Tim Schneider]

I usually say somehting to the effect of not knowing the terms (concessions, arm's length, condition of prop.) of the prior sale and that is has no impact on the value opinion in this report.

 

[kerrylanger]

Steven, do you think there is anything that can be done about it?

What would you like to see done? What are you willing to do about it? It is your state's board. Do you think the system is broken or do you agree with the board?

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The Board is the jury pool and they can absolutely disregard the RECOMMENDATION of an ALJ

Strange. Our state Administrative laws are administered by the Judiciary and they trump any board action. All the people who have beat the state board have done so basically by showing how the board conflicted with state Admin. laws. USPAP as interpreted by a board is not considered superior to state administrative law.

 

[kerrylanger]

Strange. Our state Administrative laws are administered by the Judiciary and they trump any board action. All the people who have beat the state board have done so basically by showing how the board conflicted with state Admin. laws. USPAP as interpreted by a board is not considered superior to state administrative law.

You are fortunate. The board has over-ruled the AL judge more than once in WI. Strange, it is indeed.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

If a AL judge can be over-ruled then there is little point in having one.

 

[Fred]

What would you like to see done? What are you willing to do about it? It is your state's board. Do you think the system is broken or do you agree with the board?

As far as doing something, what are the options? Have Congress amend FIREEA? Have the Wisc state legislature amend the state law? "Teach" the board USPAP?

 

[Ray Miller]

My lawyer handed me the "Request for Admissions" from the state today.

"Admit you charged the client and extra $150 to do the cost approach." Yep, was not in the original SCOPE OF WORK.

"Admit that you charged the client a total of $1400 for the final report which included the cost approach and 3 additional comparables sales." Yep, made five trips out to the property for additional pictures and other reasons at the request of the lender.

"Admit that you testified that you spent 10 or more on each appraisal, which means that you worked 5410 hours, an average of 14.0 or more hours daily, seven days per week, in 2006, and 3440 hours in the first 321 days of 2006 or an average of 10.7 or more hours daily, seven days per week." Yep, durring the boom

"Admit that the geographie area you have covered ranges from EAu Claire in the north to Beloit in the south and from Prairie du Chien in the west to New Berlin in the east. Nope

"Admit the cost approach was given secondary value in the final reconciliation." Yep.

"Admit that the report did not analyze any comparable sales from the subject neighborhood and that the five comparables sales were an average of 31 miles from the subject. could be but there were three nearer and two far out in a smilar market for A Frames on acreage.

"Admit that you did not analyze any sale from the neighborhood." Yep there were no A Frames.

"Admit that the infomation for comparable sale 2 is incorrect, as it is a duplication of the information for sale 1. Nope it is a carbon copy.

Now this next one is the good one.

"Admit that your report contains inconsistent information in that the basement finish is blank but later in the report it is indicated as unfinished." Yep I made no adjustment for basement finish and left it blank. And later int he report I noted that the basement was un-finished.


Any way I now have 182 questions to answer and detail over the weekend.

 

[Frederick]

My lawyer handed me the "Request for Admissions" from the state today.

"Admit you charged the client and extra $150 to do the cost approach." Yep, was not in the original SCOPE OF WORK.

"Admit that you charged the client a total of $1400 for the final report which included the cost approach and 3 additional comparables sales." Yep, made five trips out to the property for additional pictures and other reasons at the request of the lender.

I just had the USPAP refresher and I must have missed the part about what you are allowed to charge.

Now, Standard 1 is development
Standard 2 is reporting
Standard 3 is reviewing
Standard 4 is consulting development
Standard 5 is consulting reporting
Standard 6 is Mass Appraisal development
Standard 7 is personal property development
Standard 8 is personal property reporting
Standard 9 Business appraisal development
Standard 10 is Business appraisal reporting

Is there a Standard 11............fees?

In ain't in the book they sold me either. I got gipped!

Ray, Kidding aside, I don't know about the appraisal issues you noted but this fee business is clear evidence that they have a personal vendetta against you that is not founded in the law. I think it is time to retain more aggressive legal counsel.