Guest Columnist:
Joe Palumbo, SRA
Palumbo On USPAP is a column written by a long time appraisal colleague and friend who is currently the Director of Valuation at Weichert Relocation Resources and a user of appraisal services. He spent seven years at Washington Mutual Bank where he was a First Vice President. Mr. Palumbo holds an SRA designation, is AQB certified and he is a State Certified residential appraiser licensed in New Jersey. Joe is well-versed on the ever changing landscape of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice [USPAP] and I am fortunate to have his contributions. View his earlier handiwork on Soapbox and his interview on The Housing Helix.
-Jonathan Miller
USPAP {Un}common Sense
It’s hard to believe that I am now reading the 4th exposure draft issued by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation on December 10, 2010. It seems like only last week when we all clamored about the 2010-2011 changes to USPAP, most notably, the changes to the Ethics Rule and the disclosure of prior services performed on a property. I leave that to rest for now since we have had plenty of time to debate the impact on the appraisal community and benefit to the public, which is the major impedes for all USPAP changes. There were certainly many lively debates that took place on the topic in and out of classrooms all over the country.
As we move on to 2011 and look ahead I want to present some perspective of the entire USPAP concept, brought to light interestingly enough, by a non-licensed appraiser- student in a 15-hour USPAP class that I had presented in November. Actually this person has very little practical experience to speak of but like many of the newcomers in the industry today she is taking all the courses in succession. This approach, while not the best approach to say the least, is what is happening these days, like it or not. The just-add-water=career concept has invaded the appraisal profession. Years ago it was the practical experience you gained first or in conjunction with the course work. Licensing has a lot to do with the “fast-track” mentality. Whatever the case or the disposition of the students, I usually give the 15-hour USPAP class the speech about how “difficult or different” the 15-hour USPAP course is say versus a Capitalization or Appraisal Principles class. Numbers and definitions are one thing, ethical concepts and interpretations are another. In a math class there can only be one answer, in a class of terms and principles, they are usually straight forward. Even so, there are several areas of USPAP that can be seen as common sense. This discovery was not mine alone but it was made by “Student X” during our 15 hours together.
Here are a few of “Student X’s discoveries. While discussing the merits of the Competency Rule, “Student X” asked, “Are there appraisers out there who take on assignments without knowing how to do an appraisal?” It seems to me like one should be confident in his or her ability or don’t do the appraisal”. “Isn’t this common sense?” “Right!” some of the students quipped, “problem is they think they are competent but their work indicates something else”. One of my favorites occurred during our discussion of Standard Rule 1-5 both “a” and “b”. This Standard requires the appraiser to “analyze” both the current agreement of sale and the prior sales that have occurred in within 3 years. When I gave examples of “shortcomings” I noted that some appraisers don’t indicate what efforts they made in the normal course of business to obtain a sales contract let alone provide a “dissection or breakdown” of the agreement. We talked also talked about the details of the current listing information sometimes missing. Student X responded about this being a “no-brainer”. Her comment was something like, “I would think the details of the contract, what the listing says would be very important in determining possible fraud, what may be included in the sale, or even just trying to piece the transaction together”. Student X went on about the 3-year prior sale, “geez aren’t most users going to ask about it anyway?”. “Just stating what it sold for does not seem like a big help either”, “a lot of this stuff seems to be common sense”. BINGO I cheered….and these types of dialogues went on a few other occasions over the 2-day class. During an extended discussion regarding Advisory Opinion 22 the concept of advocacy came up. Given Student X’s keen and consistent application of what seems logical I shouldn’t have been surprised to hear her take on advocacy relative to example of the lawyer who provides litigation support services (page A-71 line 272). His comment paraphrased was, “ I would imagine that if one were to gravitate toward advocating a client’s cause that would clash with the independence, impartiality and objectivity required when performing as an appraiser”. “Yes correct” I replied, “you cannot perform both roles at the same time, you must pick one”.
After Day 2 of the class there was an exam. As the room started to empty I noticed Student X, clearing out her belongings and leaving. “Good luck in your new career” I said. “How do you think you did?” I asked? She replied, “Ok I guess, I believe I answered most of them correctly except a few. On those that I was not sure of I just used some common sense”.
Policy prohibits me from revealing if Student X passed the exam. Regardless though, that’s not the point. Here is someone who has little practical experience in our industry. She took a few concepts that give some tenured appraisers a bit of trouble and she applied rational logic. Is all of USPAP that easy to get in its entirety? NO, definitely not. I don’t know what kind of appraiser Student X will be, but I like her approach using the “common sense approach” to problem solving.
In the words of Ben Franklin, “the problem with common sense is it is not so common”. Happy New Year.
No comments:
Post a Comment