There is one tool in the appraisers tool belt regarding this issue. Yes it’s subjective but you can always turn to it, define the problem, define the penalty being imposed, and look it up on the tables.

The “Disciplinary Action Matrix.” Took a CE on this once. Another long boring read which every appraiser should have read at least once. Actually you should re read it every 2 years… This industry has lost sight of what it’s supposed to be regulating in the first place. These days the lenders and tech companies collude in a way which puts individual fraud in the rear view mirror.

https://www.appraisalfoundation.org/imis/TAF/Resources/Regulatory_Information/TAF/State_Regulatory_Agency_Resources.aspx

Can you imagine the sweeping changes to this industry if all individual amc and avm related workers were held to such a standard? Dare to dream.

The big corporations create all the risk, take all the profit, and leave governments helpless to regulate anyone except individuals whom can not afford equivalent representation. Thereby creating an incentive to ignore the crimes of big corporations and pursue microaggressions against any regular citizen whom dares work for them. Any other revelations? Was there ever a sunset rider to original appraisal regulation?

There is this thing called anti trust and rico, which should have been levied against lenders a long time ago. It’s never too late. 12/23/1913 That or individual licensing for everyone to level the playing field. Individual licensing for ALL amc workers? For all lender employees involved in the loan process. For all underwriters and associated employees. For all title agency people. For all insurance people and those that work for them. That or no licensing and move back to a strictly tort contractual obligation system. That might slow down this monstrously oversized lending apparatus slightly though.

The ingenious play of regulating one party individually, but not the other. Us little guys can not bring tort against the government, not normally. And since complaints come through the government and not the courts, the same limited redress availability is imposed. Would that be a federal tort, a state tort, something quasi? f you’ve heard the term; self asking regulation, where big corporations pretend to resist regulation but actually embrace it and actually hire the legal writers whom then implement those laws, that’s how they circumvent tort systems.

The deck is stacked against the individual. That’s why in appraisal, we should not write reports for the clients exclusively, but should also consider the merits of laborious efforts which shield us from everyone else in the process as well. A 4 hour appraisal report? Remote typing services? Unlicensed help? Trusting hybrid inspectors? It’s not hard to guess who will be in front of the state board, and who will not. The end is near.

Agreed re subjective interpretation. Good statement, but one that is unnecessary IF an appraisal is reviewed in accordance with USPAP & SR3 and SR4. The ‘protective’ wording is within USPAP itself. It’s that specific wording that is being ignored by state regulators.

Nick. the appraiser could not even see a driveway. He did not have reason to believe such an EA could or would be applicable. Legality applied to the purported ‘in-law’ quarters. Not the drive per se. 1. The reviewer either lied about seeing a driveway, or he went to the wrong house. 2. The reviewer had no way of knowing if an inlaw quarters existed or not. The ONLY credible thing he could have done was to check for a permit and compliance BEFORE saying the appraiser was wrong and dictating new comps. The reviewer made a statement of fact on something he did not and could not have known about from the scope of work described.

Yes

Those that can, do. Those who cannot, jumping to review.

“This report represents our good faith effort to comply with the requirements of USPAP as found in the current applicable issue. These standards contain rules and requirements that deal with the procedures to be followed in developing an appraisal, analysis, or opinion of value. Every effort has been made to produce a report that satisfies the requirements of USPAP. Therefore, the determination as to whether or not this, or any, report complies with USPAP cannot be considered to be an objective fact. Compliance is rather a subjective determination which is based upon the perception and interpretation by the client and review appraiser as to what constitutes compliance. This report is our good faith effort to comply with both the letter and intent of USPAP.”

I have also come to the same conclusion, based on what other appraisers have told me about how bad they were treated when they were reviewed. It’s as if the state is using USPAP as a tool to generate income. We are not dealing with plutonium people, all we are doing is reporting what the market is doing. The appraisers who are going to complete the desk top reports will be spending a lot of time and money with these “regulators.” It is going to be a cash cow for them when the complaints start coming in.