Table of Contents Table of Contents
Previous Page  40 / 77 Next Page
Information
Show Menu
Previous Page 40 / 77 Next Page
Page Background

USPAP 2018-2019 Edition

© The Appraisal Foundation

28

STANDARD 3

(g) determine the scope of work necessary to produce credible assignment results in accordance with the

SCOPE OF WORK RULE.

49

Comment: Reviewers have broad flexibility and significant responsibility in determining the appropriate scope

of work in an appraisal review assignment.

Information that should have been considered by the original appraiser can be used by the reviewer in

developing an opinion as to the quality of the work under review.

Information that was not available to the original appraiser in the normal course of business may also be used

by the reviewer; however, the reviewer must not use such information in the reviewer’s development of an

opinion as to the quality of the work under review.

STANDARDS RULE 3-3

In developing an appraisal review, a reviewer must apply the appraisal review methods and techniques that are

necessary for credible assignment results.

(a) When necessary for credible assignment results in the review of analyses, opinions, and conclusions, the

reviewer must:

(i)

develop an opinion as to whether the analyses are appropriate within the context of the

requirements applicable to that work;

(ii)

develop an opinion as to whether the opinions and conclusions are credible within the context of

the requirements applicable to that work; and

(iii) develop the reasons for any disagreement.

Comment: Consistent with the reviewer’s scope of work, the reviewer is required to develop an opinion as

to the completeness, accuracy, adequacy, relevance, and reasonableness of the analysis in the work under

review, given law, regulations, or intended user requirements applicable to the work under review.

(b) When necessary for credible assignment results in the review of a report, the reviewer must:

(i)

develop an opinion as to whether the report is appropriate and not misleading within the context of

the requirements applicable to that work; and

(ii)

develop the reasons for any disagreement.

Comment: Consistent with the reviewer’s scope of work, the reviewer is required to develop an opinion as to

the completeness, accuracy, adequacy, relevance, and reasonableness of the report, given law, regulations,

or intended user requirements applicable to that work.

(c) When the assignment includes the reviewer developing his or her own opinion of value or review opinion,

the following apply:

50

(i)

The requirements of STANDARDS 1, 5, 7, or 9 apply to the reviewer’s opinion of value for the

property that is the subject of the appraisal review assignment.

(ii)

The requirements of STANDARD 3 apply to the reviewer’s opinion of quality for the work that is the

subject of the appraisal review assignment.

Comment: These requirements apply to:

• The reviewer’s own opinion of value when the subject of the review is the product of an appraisal

assignment; or

49 See Advisory Opinion 28,

Scope of Work Decision, Performance, and Disclosure

, and Advisory Opinion 29,

An Acceptable Scope of Work.

50 See Advisory Opinion 20,

An Appraisal Review Assignment That Includes the Reviewer’s Own Opinion of Value.

853

854

855

856

857

858

859

860

861

862

863

864

865

866

867

868

869

870

871

872

873

874

875

876

877

878

879

880

881

882

883

884

885

886

887

888

889

890