Or not at all! And it’s unfortunate that not enough of us will decline and they will keep on rolling over us. I’m one that will be declining Fannie orders. I am pushing ever harder to work with local banks that keep their loans in house.

ANSI came out in 1996 and was probably fine for homes built in 1996 or later. It is laughable when used for many much older homes. I have corresponded with Home Innovation which indicated to me that when ANSI measure standards do not work in these older homes ANSI declarations #2 & #3 should be used to opt out. In Fannie Mae’s interpretation of ANSI there is only a limited opt out for occasional use (GX001). Ridiculous! One of the most egregious ANSI issues is when a 2 story home from decades earlier has a 6’5″ 2nd floor ceiling height which does not meet the ANSI minimum 7′ standard so it is no longer square footage. The potential comps may or may not have the ANSI required 7′ height. There is no source for this comp information. The assessors do not have this information nor do the agents. Fannie Mae ignores this fact and merely states that the appraiser should simply keep researching as if there was some hidden source. Need more? In my state, New York, the assessors manual requires the lower level of raised ranches and splits to be measured as square footage if finished in a similar fashion to the upper floor since that is what the architect intended. Agents agree. ANSI says it is not square footage. Still need more? Only Fannie Mae requires ANSI. Freddie Mac, USDA, FHA (HUD), VA, and 48 states do not require ANSI.

2nd floors that are not ANSI compliant are typically legal non-compliant and are well accepted as square footage in subjects market.

I use “Property Observation” instead of Inspection. Just my two cents.

That’s the only reason they want us in this equation…OUR LICENSE! Again we will be the only entity held accountable, that’s why I will not do these. 3,2,1…oh you’re not modernizing, you’ll be left behind, blah blah blah. OK, you go ahead, belive that, perform them and I sit back and watch what happens to those you do them and things go south.

“nothing stops actual appraisers from providing an even better description of the inspection activities” you say. Yes- most of these “desktops” will have pre-defined ways to describe the “inspection” (or “non-inspection”) and any descriptions will be hidden in a thousand lines of legalese. It will show photos, sketches, etc. and “look” at first glance like a regular “full interior” appraisal done by an appraiser. Third party inspectors will be instructed to be purposely vague about their exact status and credentials when at the home. It will not be made clear to end users (and homeowners) exactly what occurred unless they dig.

I always state- “interior/exterior inspection of the improvement”.

Or simply… inspection of the property.

“On site visit” instead? I think the alternate description is an excellent idea. If amc’s hijack and re purpose ‘appraisal inspection’, nothing stops actual appraisers from providing an even better description of the inspection activities.

I personally have performed an in person appraisal inspection on site visit and we don’t need any stinking amc’s or unlicensed third party help! Wait, I’ll have to come up with something better than that but you get the gist of it.

Nice deflection. Apples to apples. Not apples to oranges.

And yes you should know better if anyone. But maybe not~

The term “Site” can mean more than the land. As in, “The Hilton Hotel was the site of the conference.”

Is MAI considered to be a derogatory term?

“Site visit” may work for commercial properties or land, but it is a common, well-understood term in residential appraisal and also hard-coded onto most standard appraisal forms. To remove this definition for the “dictionary” definition lead to this suddenly being unclear and is an attempt ONLY to “muddy the waters” and pretend an appraisal is something that its not. They can “pretend” this is the same as most full, interior appraisals have been for decades when in fact, it is not. Yes, there will be a line buried deep in a scope of work statement explaining it, but that will not alleviate the mass confusion and outright fraud this will create with the public at large and even many lenders.

“SITE VISIT? means you visited the parcel of land the “improvement” sits upon. OR basically a survey and evaluation of the existing characteristics of a site and its surroundings. It defines nothing of inspecting the actual improvement.

Although ANSI measuring requirements are not related to USPAP or TAF, your point is taken. The GSE’s surveyed a small population of appraisers and discussed ANSI measuring at privately sponsored appraisal events which are attend by less than 5% of the total licensed and certified appraisers. Then Fannie Mae drops the bomb on the remaining 95% of appraisers that in 12 weeks you have to learn, implement and conform to ANSI measuring standards. This is the type of requirement that should be rolled out in 12 months, not 12 weeks.

That’s only the first part. Wait until they deal with data insecurity and predatory interests as a ‘digital fingerprint’ of the inside of their home is stored in cloud databases and shared among an ever expanding network of big tech enterprises and ongoing data brokerage.

https://appraisersblogs.com/changes-from-fannie-mae-ansi-desktop-appraisals-n-virtual-inspections/#comment-33283

That’s exactly what happened with the ansi advisement counsel. If you’ll recall that thread we posted the critical response links which contained many appraisers whom were almost universally in objection to ansi across the board measurement standards, but the standards were adopted anyways. The illusion of democracy in systems where those being affected have no real vote. Lots of that going around lately. Socialism: ideas so good, they have to be mandatory. Further examples of the cosmic cobra breeding farm.

In case you missed a few articles which explained the root cause of these shenanigans; the cosmic cobra breeding farm. Which is a reference to perverse financial incentives which in the end create more of the exact things the efforts were supposed to mitigate. ‘The cobra effect’.
https://appraisersblogs.com/bombshell-cobra-book-favorite-target-TAF-president-david-bunton
https://appraisersblogs.com/cracked-foundation-deep-dive-into-appraisal-regulatory-system-structure
(The explanation of the cobra breeding farm is in the first few minutes of this broadcast in the second link.)

If I’m going to be tied to the desk and from this point forward never have liberty of time or the benefits of knowledge, experience, industry connections and personal connections gained from being on site, I want benefits and paid vacation. That’s no less than what those pushing these proposals enjoy. Let me count the times that I help home owners with direct conversations about process, home management, carving out solutions like subject to scenarios for construction in process, etc… That’s like every few appraisals. They’re just repackaging the same thing, repeated attempts at pushing through something which the appraisal community has already largely rejected. Official policy changes mean nothing. My final work products will not change.