A reviewer disagrees with an original appraiser's value but finds the work compliant and well supported. The review should:
Correct Answer
B) Report the compliance finding and any separate value opinion clearly
Why this is correct: A review assignment has two potential components: evaluating the completeness and compliance of the original work, and potentially developing the reviewer's own opinion. These are separate conclusions. The report must clearly communicate both the compliance finding and any separate value opinion. Why the other choices are wrong: Reporting only the reviewer's independent value omits the required evaluation of the original report's compliance. Declaring the original report non-compliant is incorrect if the work was found to be compliant and well-supported. Declining to state any conclusion fails to meet the objectives of the review assignment. Exam tip: In a review, you can agree with the work but disagree with the value. Report both findings distinctly: 'The report complies, but my opinion of value is X.'
Why This Is the Correct Answer
Option B is correct because it preserves both conclusions and requires each to be communicated clearly. The compliance finding answers the question the review assignment was engaged to answer, and the separate value opinion answers a different question the client also asked. Reporting them distinctly prevents readers from inferring that a different value implies deficient work. It also reflects that the reviewer's own value opinion carries its own development obligations rather than riding on the review.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Option A: Report only the reviewer's own independent value conclusion
Reporting only the reviewer's value omits the review conclusion, which is the core deliverable of a review assignment and what distinguishes a review from an ordinary appraisal. The client engaged an evaluation of the work under review and would receive none. This also leaves the original appraiser's compliance unaddressed even though the reviewer examined it.
Option C: Declare the original report non-compliant
Declaring the work non-compliant when the reviewer found it compliant and well supported would be a false statement in the review report, and a review report that misleads its users breaches the reviewer's own obligations. Disagreement about a value conclusion is not evidence of a standards violation. This option converts a difference of judgment into an accusation.
Option D: Decline to state any conclusion at all
Declining to state any conclusion defeats the purpose of the engagement, since a review assignment exists to produce an opinion about the work reviewed. Silence would leave the client with nothing actionable and would not satisfy the review reporting requirements. Discomfort with disagreeing is not a basis for withholding a conclusion the reviewer actually reached.
Two Questions, Two Answers
A review with a value opinion answers two questions. Was the work done properly, and what do I think the property is worth. Those answers are independent, so yes and a different number is a perfectly coherent result. Write them on separate lines so nobody reads one as the other.
How to use: Separate the compliance question from the value question before choosing an answer. Then look for the option that reports both. Eliminate options that drop one conclusion, that convert a value disagreement into a compliance failure, or that refuse to conclude anything.
Exam Tip
Remember that reasonable appraisers can differ on value without either being non-compliant; a review that treats a different number as proof of error is itself the error.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- -Treating a difference in value opinion as evidence of a standards violation
- -Reporting a reviewer's value opinion without also stating the review conclusion
- -Developing a reviewer's value opinion without meeting the development requirements for it
Concept Deep Dive
Analysis
This question tests the separation between two distinct conclusions a review assignment can produce. The first is the review opinion itself, an opinion about the quality of the work under review, including whether it complies with applicable requirements and whether its results are credible. The second, which the client may or may not request, is the reviewer's own opinion of value, which is a separate conclusion developed under the applicable development standards. These are independent findings, and they can point different directions without contradiction: an appraisal can be fully compliant, well documented, and defensible while a second competent appraiser, weighing the same data or a somewhat different data set, lands on a different number. Value opinions are judgments about a range of reasonable outcomes, not calculations with one right answer. What the review report must do is state each conclusion clearly and separately, so a reader can see that the disagreement is about the number rather than about the quality of the work. Blurring them would let a mere difference of opinion read as a compliance failure, which would be both inaccurate and unfair to the original appraiser.
Background Knowledge
You need to know that a review assignment produces an opinion about the quality of other appraisal work, and that when the reviewer also develops an opinion of value, the applicable development and reporting standards for that value opinion apply in addition to the review requirements. You should also know that the review report must identify the work reviewed, the scope of the review, the reviewer's opinion and the reasoning for it, and any separate value opinion with its own support.
Real-World Application
Reviewing an appraisal on an industrial building, a reviewer finds the scope of work appropriate, the data verified, and the adjustments supported, but weighs a fourth sale more heavily and concludes a value about six percent lower. The review report states the work is compliant and credible and separately states the reviewer's value with its own support.
More USPAP Questions
Which statement best defines a hypothetical condition under USPAP?
According to the Competency Rule, if an appraiser lacks the knowledge and experience to complete an assignment competently, which action is NOT acceptable?
An appraiser runs only the sales comparison approach on a standard tract home and omits the cost and income approaches. Under Standard 1 this is:
A value opinion for a subdivision as if fully built out two years from now is what kind of assignment, and what does it require?
A hypothetical condition differs from an extraordinary assumption in that a hypothetical condition:
An appraiser must disclose in the certification whether they have:
A client-imposed requirement — 'use only comps from our approved list' — is best described as:
Under Standard 1, when developing a real property appraisal, an appraiser must:
The certification required by Standards Rule 2-3 must be signed by:
According to Standard 1, when developing an opinion of market value, an appraiser must analyze:
People Also Study
Real Estate Market
13.6% of exam
Property Description
11.8% of exam
Land or Site Valuation
4.5% of exam
Sales Comparison Approach
16.4% of exam
Cost Approach
13.6% of exam