Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Applicant Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves an applicant’s samples after USPAP-related questions on adjustments and certifications
Summary
The Real Estate Appraisal Commission approved RCR applicant Bradford Even’s work samples after commissioners raised questions about unexplained comparable adjustments and whether contributors were properly identified or certificated under USPAP guidance. The applicant explained a log error and the commission asked staff for follow-up documentation.
The Real Estate Appraisal Commission approved the submitted work samples of RCR applicant Bradford Even after commissioners pressed him to clarify adjustments and signing practices in his appraisal reports.
Commissioner Bob criticized parts of Even’s submissions for lacking detail about how adjustments to comparable sales were derived and for not showing who had signed or been identified in the certification. “Any appraiser who provides significant appraisal or appraisal review assistance in the assignment must sign a certification or be identified in a certification,” the commissioner said, citing USPAP (Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice) guidance and Advisory Opinion 31 as the standard the commission expects to see accounted for in reports.
The applicant, Bradford Even, told the commission he discovered a log-entry error after the meeting and that, on one occasion, he performed preliminary research but did not complete the field inspection or full report for the cited address. “I was unable to make it to the inspection and therefore did not complete a full report,” Even said, explaining the missing sample. He said he reviewed his logs afterward and corrected what he called a single-day error.
After discussion, Commissioner Bob moved to approve Even’s work samples “as submitted.” The motion was seconded and approved by voice vote. The chair thanked the applicant’s sponsors and directed the applicant (and a listed contact, Ms. Stevens) to follow up with staff (Debbie) for next steps and timelines.
The commission also opened a separate new-business item for another RCR applicant, Beata Jaworski, who said she had delivered six reports to staff. Commissioners identified specific files they would like staff to request and review (three-family, single-family, condominium and older single-family examples) and encouraged the applicant to bring her sponsor to the commission’s in-person September meeting in Hartford for further review.
What happens next: Staff will confirm the requested samples and documentation and report back at the next meeting; the commission scheduled a full in-person meeting in September.
