Nebraska Administrative Code Topic - REAL PROPERTY APPRAISER BOARD
1. Case: Unlicensed Practice
Scenario:
An individual performed real estate appraisals for a bank without holding a Nebraska appraiser license.
NAC Provisions Involved:
Licensure requirements for trainee, licensed, certified residential, and certified general appraisers.
Rules prohibiting unlicensed practice.
Outcome:
The Board issued a cease-and-desist order.
The individual was required to stop performing appraisals immediately.
Afterward, they had to apply for the appropriate license and demonstrate compliance with education and experience requirements before performing any further appraisals.
Explanation:
This case illustrates the Board’s role in enforcing licensure standards and protecting the public from unqualified practitioners.
2. Case: Failure to Maintain Continuing Education (CE)
Scenario:
A licensed residential appraiser renewed their license but failed to complete the required continuing education hours within the renewal period.
NAC Provisions Involved:
Continuing education requirements for renewal (typically 28 hours for licensed and certified residential appraisers).
Sections specifying audit and documentation requirements.
Outcome:
The Board placed the license on probation until the CE hours were completed.
The appraiser was also fined for late compliance.
Future renewals required proof of timely CE completion to avoid suspension.
Explanation:
This case highlights how the Board ensures that appraisers maintain up-to-date knowledge and professional competence.
3. Case: Conflict of Interest
Scenario:
An appraiser performed a property appraisal for a relative without disclosing the relationship in the report.
NAC Provisions Involved:
Professional ethics rules, including disclosure of relationships or conflicts of interest.
Standards of professional conduct consistent with USPAP (Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice).
Outcome:
The Board issued a formal reprimand.
The appraiser was required to complete ethics training.
Future reports had to include a disclosure statement regarding any potential conflicts.
Explanation:
Conflict of interest cases show the Board’s focus on impartiality and protecting the integrity of appraisal reports.
4. Case: Submitting False or Misleading Reports
Scenario:
A certified general appraiser submitted an appraisal report inflating the value of a commercial property to benefit the client.
NAC Provisions Involved:
Rules prohibiting fraud, misrepresentation, or falsification of appraisal reports.
Enforcement provisions for disciplinary actions.
Outcome:
The Board revoked the appraiser’s license.
The appraiser was barred from reapplying for a set period.
A public notice of the revocation was issued to alert lenders and the public.
Explanation:
This demonstrates the Board’s zero-tolerance policy for fraudulent reporting and its role in maintaining public trust in real estate valuation.
5. Case: Supervisory Failures (Trainee Appraisers)
Scenario:
A licensed appraiser supervising a trainee failed to provide proper guidance or review reports according to NAC rules.
NAC Provisions Involved:
Requirements for supervising trainee appraisers, including review and oversight duties.
Documentation standards to ensure the trainee’s work meets professional standards.
Outcome:
The supervising appraiser received a probationary sanction.
They had to submit a plan demonstrating how they would comply with supervision rules in the future.
Any appraisals signed by the trainee without proper supervision were voided or flagged.
Explanation:
This case emphasizes the Board’s role in ensuring proper mentorship and oversight of trainees to maintain high appraisal standards.
6. Case: Negligence or Incompetence
Scenario:
An appraiser repeatedly submitted appraisal reports with significant errors in square footage, comparable sales, or valuation methodology.
NAC Provisions Involved:
Standards for professional competence and care.
Procedures for investigating complaints and correcting errors.
Outcome:
The Board suspended the license for a specific period.
The appraiser had to complete additional training in appraisal methodology.
Reports were monitored for quality before full reinstatement.
Explanation:
This case illustrates how the Board protects consumers from appraisers whose work demonstrates incompetence or repeated errors.
RELATED Blog
comments