URARS

Add a Comment

Comment by Kenneth J. Miller on December 19, 2008 at 10:49pm

The link for The "Right Start" Step Three - Association leads to Step Two - Tariffs instead of where it is supposed to lead to. Just a heads up.

Comment by Patrick Egger on November 4, 2008 at 11:26am

Hans,

Welcome aboard. The URARS.org and .com URLs have been reserved, but not activated at this point, give me some time to work on it. I appreciate the comments, I think the URARS could be effective as well.

The keys are the same as mentioned in the URARS series on The Appraisal Scoop, patience, persistance and compromise. Start small to get a consensus on key issues and expand from there.

At all times, the focus in not on AMC's, etc., it is on us and how we communicate what we did, why we did it and what we based it on. This is a communication problem and it will take time to improve and standardize the process.

Comment by Hans G. Schaetzke on November 4, 2008 at 10:11am

I have left this message at a couple of stops now trying to get information on the URARS project but I'll say it again.

I think the URARS project can do more to promote public trust in our industry than membership in any professional organization (NAIFA, AI) because it goes directly to the people, the users of our reports. It lets them know that we don't just fill-in-the-blanks and it will be a matter of public record at URARS.org.

I want to contribute heavily and I need to know where the deep discussions on the topic are occuring. Please tell me where to go if you know.

As my first suggestion, lets find a thorough way to analyze the prior sales/listing histories of the subject and comparables. The URAR form(s) don't ask us to report, rather to analyze. If users of our reports found just how helpful this can be they might start demanding that the "form-filler appraisers" actually do it and that would raise the bar.

Comment by Tim Ferguson on October 28, 2008 at 1:56pm

I agree with Glenn, I put about 500 miles on my truck a week. I have been appraising in rural areas from the beginning, because no one in the office at that time want to. It is almost impossible to use the forms for rural areas. I think we need to look at a more narrative type form than anything.

Comment by Patrick Egger on October 24, 2008 at 9:23am

To all, see Brian's "suggestion post", you have to click on the discussion form topics above to comment on those topics" and have a thread continue. I'll be in Orlando at the A la Mode Convention for a few days. When I get back, we'll get started and hopefully deeper into the URARS.

Comment by Bob Nixon on October 22, 2008 at 5:44pm

I don't think it affects the URARS at all. For those rural areas, or unusual properties we just adapt what we are doing. When the URAR form first came out the old timers thought it would destroy the profession as well.

Comment by Brian Davis on October 22, 2008 at 1:02pm

TO ALL - Suggestion: Please use the "Discussion Forum" (above) for threaded comments. The "Comment Wall" does NOT thread comments with new topics. The "Comment Wall" comments will only hold about 10 comments and then they begin to drop off.

Comment by Glenn Forsyth on October 22, 2008 at 12:42pm

Dear Patrick,

I just read your most recent contribution on Appraisal Scoop. I concur with what you say (as usual).

An area that I am concerned about in regards to "uniform standards" as you suggest however, is the tendency to push everything into a box. As an appraiser that appraises alot of "rural" type property we are constantly confronted with trying to "fit" into FNMA Guidelines, even though Fnma Guidelines themselves acknowledge in Section 402/3 that all properties do not have to fit. How is it possible to create the flexibility needed by those of us that do not appraise in tract subdivisions, while also creating uniformity. Already it is hard, as it is to define a "neighborhood" let alone if we try to fit into tighter standards. If we could fit those tighter standards, computers probably could do our jobs. The reality is that real estate still has variances that require the appraiser's subjective interpretations.

Comment by Patrick Egger on October 22, 2008 at 12:35pm

To all, please read the Appraisal Scoop series "The Right Start" (if you haven't) and also take a look at The Clarification of Scope of Work addendum linked to in that series. I think that will be a got place to start from.

I ahve to prepare for Orlando this weekend with a la mode, but have part two of the series drafted, will tray to get "my editor to post it" and will continue the series next week.

You don't have to wait on me, start commenting on what you think should be The Right Start. What do we need to address (that already isn't in the COSOW) change, improve, etc. to create a basic URARS addendum?