Arkansas appraiser licensing and certification board

Martin stated that upon receiving the complaint from Martinez, he sent a copy of the complaint to appellee and requested that he provide them with a copy of the appraisal report that he prepared for his client, Bank of Little Rock.

He stated that the appraisal submitted by appellee and the one provided by Martinez were not identical; that the report provided by appellee included a paragraph in his additional-comments section with the heading, "Additional comments requested by the underwriter," but that there was no indication that it was a revised appraisal or that it had been amended.

He stated that the deed shows a filing date of January 4, , but that it was actually filed on February 4, , after the transaction was closed on February 3, Martin acknowledged, however, that the buyer and seller had agreed on the purchase price before the closing date and that the closing involved the actual transfer of title and passing of money.

Appellee testified that he has operated CBM Appraisals for approximately six years, that he has been licensed since , and that he has done approximately appraisalssince He said that his brother, Eugene Lee Maris, is a loan officer at the Bank of Little Rock Mortgage Company; that it was Eugene who asked him to prepare the appraisal; that his father, Pete Maris, is the chairman of the board of the bank; and that his uncle and his uncle's son and wife own Standard Abstract and Title Company, which does a lot of work for the bank and closed on this property.

Appellee then reviewed the appraisal that he prepared. He stated that the actual age of the house disclosed was thirty-two years, and that he wrote fifteen as the effective age, which made the remaining economic life approximately forty-five years. He stated that using a simple straight-line time for depreciation would make the depreciation of the house over fifty percent, which was not an accurate value, so he used a depreciation rate of fifteen percent in arriving at his value.

He said that he arrived at the fifteen percent by taking the actual depreciation of all three comparables; that the first comparable was fifteen and one-half percent, the second comparable was fourteen percent, and the third comparable was approximately fourteen percent.

He said that he "just rounded off" to fifteen percent, acknowledging that rounding off in that fashion made the depreciation rate a little higher. With respect to the confusion on the fireplace, he stated that he just overlooked the fact that the third comparable had a fireplace and that the subject property did not, and that he made no adjustment. He statedthat he did not use the income approach because he did not have any sales that were rentals and that he did not have sufficient information to fit an income evaluation.

He said he obtained that information from his brother. With respect to his failure to disclose his relationship with the borrower and the chairman of the board of his client, appellee stated that he just did not think about including them when he signed the certification attesting to the fact that he had no personal interest with the parties involved with the assignment.

He stated that in order to correct the problem he has been including a statement that he is related to the loan officer "and the mortgage company as well as the Bank of Little Rock.

Appellee explained that there were additional comments in the Exhibit 7 appraisal provided by him that were not included in the Exhibit 5 appraisal from Martinez because the underwriter at the Bank of Little Rock, Linda Overstreet, asked for additional information. He said that she contacted him directly and asked for the additional information and that he had no idea what the bank did with the additional information. He stated that he has done a number of appraisals for his brother; that on a number of occasions the appraisal was less than the brother had agreed to pay and, as a consequence, he could not get financing; that he had made some appraisals that came out within the parameter of the offer and acceptance; and that the subject appraisal "appears to give him the ability to get percent financing.

He acknowledged that there were errors in the appraisals, which he attributed to oversight and bad proofreading, among other things.

Appellee stated that he did not recall when the underwriter requested the additional comments nor when he provided them, but that it was after January He stated that when he provided the additional comments, he did not change the date and resign the appraisal with a new date.

He explained that he typically uses the closing date as the sale date for property, that the sales dates for his comparables were actual closing dates, and that he typically examines an offer and acceptance in preparing an appraisal. He said that he did not know why he did not do so in this case. Appellee stated that he put the rent schedule in the appraisal because the client asked for it as the property was going to be used for rental purposes.

He explained that the subject property was located in Leawood, and that the second comparable was located in the Cherry Creek subdivision, which is in west Little Rock off Bowman Road. He said that the age ofthose houses is probably ten to twelve years, but that his appraisal says twenty years.

He said that he did not recall why he put twenty. He also acknowledged that his comment that the property had been updated since the date of purchase was not correct because those updates had not been made on the date of his inspection and the date of his report, January Appellee further acknowledged that with respect to rental values, he should have indicated "owner" as the source of his information and that the county had no way of knowing what somebody rents their house for.

He also acknowledged that he was in error when he noted that the subject property was not currently under contract. Appellee stated that the appraised value came out higher than the list price because the comparables adjusted out higher.

He stated that he used a comparable in a subdivision that was half the age of the subject property because it was the best comparable he could find at the time of the appraisal.

Welcome to the Arkansas. With this new Citizen Central service, you can find information online about every county and municipality in Arkansas, including contact information, basic facts, elected officials, and online services. Select a county using the map, or use the search below to locate a county or municipality. Arkansas has more than municipalities. Local government in Arkansas provides many essential services to the citizens of the community, including road construction and maintenance, solid waste disposal, water utilities and waste water treatment, police and fire protection and emergency rescue, land use planning and building inspection, and public education for grades K Charles Stuttgart.

Banks Hermitage Warren. Hampton Harrell Thornton Tinsman. Dermott Eudora Lake Village. Arkansas has over 1, real estate appraisers.

These men and women contribute to the economy and well-being of the state through their daily work. A professional real estate appraisal is an essential and important component of any real estate transaction. The primary purpose of this website is to be a resource to residents of Arkansas seeking information about real estate appraisers. The Arkansas Appraiser Licensing and Certification Board is charged with protecting the public interest through regulation, examination, and licensing of Arkansas real estate appraisers and the registration of Appraisal Management Companies AMCs.

It is our intent to maintain a system of licensing and regulating real estate appraisers that is in compliance with federal guidelines and results in license holders that have verified adequate education, experience, and have demonstrated a competency to provide quality service consistent with their specific credentials.

The Arkansas Appraiser Licensing and Certification Board also investigates complaints against real estate appraisers and Appraisal Management Companies.