Appraisers' Free Forum

Currently any grievances filed with the OK Appraisal Board cannot be anonymous. Personally, I believe that if you think you have a solid reason to file a grievance you ought to have the gonads and the solid evidence to stand behind it. However, there are many appraisers who are afraid to file complaints against their peers in fear of retribution.

Oklahoma is debating whether ot not we should change our policy and allow anonymous complaints. There is a hearing on January 28 and I would like to get some input from those of you whose states allow these. I know Florida does.

Can you give me some feedback? Thanks a bunch!!!

At the USPAP class Danny Wiley taught last year, this was discussed. Danny told us that any time he had to file a complaint against someone for a USPAP violation in TN, he did so anonymously to avoid prejudicing the decision of the board against the appraiser. (Imagine the predicament you'd be in: the sitting chair of the ASB accuses you of a USPAP violation. You could defend it, but your presumption of innocence would be shot to hell.) So that's one special-case argument in favor of anonymous complaints.

Annemieke Roell wrote:Personally, I believe that if you think you have a solid reason to file a grievance you ought to have the gonads and the solid evidence to stand behind it.

I couldn't agree more.

The late Randy Beigh once told me WA State was going to allow anonymous complaints, but I haven't verified that.

At one time I was all for turning in appraisers anonymously if they'd written a fraudulent report(s), however, I now feel it shouldn't be allowed.

I see both sides of this situation. However, I support the NO side of it.

In NM, you have to file a complaint with your name, have it notorized and then send it. It goes through several processes before it appears before the board. And the board members only have a case number and not the appraiser or the complainant's name/s.

When a homeowner suspects a fraudulent appraisal, they can't send in the report and get it checked out? They have to have it notarized? the report should be a stand alone document. When I send a complaint into the state, it is not me that brings the proceedings. It is the board that does that. But give the defense attorney a chance and they will cross examine me rather than deal with the report (this has happened EVERY time I appear as witness). Why does it matter WHO files the gripe? If the report is bad, the report itself is the condemning factor. If the report is NOT bad, they it is dismissed.

Goodpasture wrote:When a homeowner suspects a fraudulent appraisal, they can't send in the report and get it checked out? They have to have it notarized? the report should be a stand alone document. When I send a complaint into the state, it is not me that brings the proceedings. It is the board that does that. But give the defense attorney a chance and they will cross examine me rather than deal with the report (this has happened EVERY time I appear as witness). Why does it matter WHO files the gripe? If the report is bad, the report itself is the condemning factor. If the report is NOT bad, they it is dismissed.

Why are you being called as a witness, since you were nothing more than a conduit? Were you unable to refrain from expressing your opinion? If you told the board what you thought in some sort of an effort to influence them, then you should be a witness. And just you try sending in a report and leaving it up to the board to let it speak for itself. Never happen, Chief.

I'm not necessarily against anonymous complaints, but I am not so-far inspired by the boards either, and my understanding is that some of the worst act like "star chambers" already.

Secrecy is the antithesis of transparency. And our system is best served by transparency and adversary, period.

Greg, your comments after a month of this persuaded me that Annemieke is right although she is some how used this issue as another opportunity to focus on gonads. Put your name on it and be willing to testify. I already know you don't take turning-in lightly, but anonymity mostly just erodes the legitimacy of justice. Get over your phobia of cross examination, or hate, or whatever. Consider it an opportunity.

You are a hero and a beacon in the profession. It comes with a cost and it really isn't too much to pay.

You misunderstand. Lawyers walk wide around me. I have NO problem putting my name on a complaint. Those that I am concerned about are those without the knowledge and experience to defend what they feel is a travesty committed on them or those who are aware of a bad appraisal but are afraid, for business or other reasons, to file a complaint. This is one reason why I have told trainees and appraisers in small towns that if they are afraid to file a complaint on their supervisors or co-workers or their competition, to send me the file and I will do it (provided I think it is warranted).

So, where's the beef?

Goodpasture wrote:If the report is NOT bad, they it is dismissed.

Over my career I've seen about as many unpardonable reviews as I've seen terrible reports.

I cannot iiiiiiiiiiiimagine how bogged down the State Boards would become if every appraiser was suddenly given carte blanche to take a crack at their competition.

I use to wish for the gift to be able to send in reports anonymously, but after receiving unpardonable reviews myself & watching the way people go after each other on the AF...I've changed my mind.

I now believe the danger of overburdening the system outwieghs the need for anonymous tips. If you can't put your name on it...if you can't defend your opinions...you shouldn't be allowed to turn it in.

Otis wrote:I see both sides of this situation. However, I support the NO side of it.

I see both sides of this situation. However, I support the YES side of it.

Really, for one simple reason. The complaint of a bad appraisal should be judged based on the evidence... what was the appraisal like? Did the appraiser use made-up information or not? Did the appraiser make an error or errors that leads to a misleading conclusion, or not? Who turned the damned thing in should have nothing to do with it.

In Missouri, anonymous complaints are allowed and I think it's a good thing. If another local appraiser wants to turn in my work, then I will defend it (the work), if possible, and not attack the messenger. However, I am well aware that not all appraisers feel the same way. Therefore, I will not turn in any appraiser for anything and attach my name to it. If I think something is wrong, I will send in the complaint, anonymously, with a description of what I think is wrong. Then, let the chips fall where they will... I don't want to have a stake in it, just the way I feel.

The alternative, IMHO, is to have some system as convoluted and often-misused as the whistle-blower law. Do you really want all of that bureaucracy and skull-drudgery?

From past pronouncements, I know that there are members of MREAC who would like to do away with anonymous complaints. I think that, for the most part, their reasoning is reasonable. They say that they get complaints where they need more information, but don't know who to contact. They say that they feel more inclined to reject a complaint turned in anonymously unless the evidence is included and is iron-clad. They say that the accused should get the chance to face their accuser in open court, if it comes to that. All of these are reasonable arguments.

However, IMHO, they are outweighed by one simple fact. An appraisal is an opinion supported by information and analysis. There are a set of rules appraisers must follow when making an appraisal. If those rules are violated, then the document should speak for itself, unless the appraiser can defend it... I see no reason to require that another person speak against it, it is what it is.

Accuse me of being part of the problem if you will, but personally, I will never turn in an appraisal if I have to attach my name to it. (Not being a reviewer, I have rarely turned one in anonymously, either.) I am told that a large number of those bad reports are turned in by Fannie Mae and similar clients. Frankly, I believe that is how it should be. Anytime a client has a complaint about my work or anyone else's I always make them aware of the fact that they have the option to turn it in if they truly believe there is something wrong.

Mako --- anybody who reviews and sends in reports in order to get rid of the competition should not only, in my opinion, be a review appraiser but should also be suspended for unprofessional behaviour.

All the arguments above, while I am still against the anonymous filing of complaints, causes me to think that the process should be as follows:

A person (be it an appraiser or a member of the public) sends a a report or inquiry in to the board, with their name attached, at which [point it is a grievance. It then goes through the system and if the Probably Cause Committee determines there is indeed a problem with the report, it then becomes a complaint, which is filed by the board against the appraiser. This way the board and procecuting attorney have a contact name for further questions and the filer remains unknown in the records.

Indeed, the lenders should be the ones filing these reports. But they don't.

Indeed, the lenders should be the ones filing these reports. But they don't

According to the MO Board (last April, or maybe it was the April before... I've slept since then) part of the reason they are so far behind in their work is because of the large number of referrals from Fannie.

Steve Owen wrote:

Indeed, the lenders should be the ones filing these reports. But they don't

According to the MO Board (last April, or maybe it was the April before... I've slept since then) part of the reason they are so far behind in their work is because of the large number of referrals from Fannie.

Yes, same here. Fannie is the exception.

Annemieke Roell wrote:............ the filer remains unknown in the records.........

Until discovery. Or a FOIA request and a judge says to open it. then it no longer becomes a solely question as to the integrity of the report, but encompasses the qualifications of the complainant.

Goodpasture wrote:

Annemieke Roell wrote:............ the filer remains unknown in the records.........

Until discovery. Or a FOIA request and a judge says to open it. then it no longer becomes a solely question as to the integrity of the report, but encompasses the qualifications of the complainant.

I don't see why. The report itself accompanied by the Board's reviewer's report should be sufficient.