skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Time to catch up on some of our adventures. The beginning of September I started working on building the front porch. The permit was pulled, the holes were dug, the footers for the posts poured, and then on September 16 the pump stopped working.
Matt and I tried pulling the old pump. It wouldn't budge. Turning the power off and on assured us the motor was still working -- or at least trying to work (we could feel the pipe torque) -- but no water would come up. 105 feet down, it seemed to be stuck, maybe in mud, but we couldn't tell.
I remembered the last time we pulled it, just before Mike and Suzi got married. The location under the front stoop made it very difficult to work on, and we knew that the old casing was rusty and would cause us some problems. A 4 inch pump slides into a 4 inch steel casing nicely when the casing is new, but when it is rusty, there is a lot of friction. We thought it over, and decided it was time to drill a new well.
Old well under the stoop.
Old pump after Frontz pulled it.
No water for over a week. We hauled water in 5 gallon containers from Jesse's house and from Grannie's house. It was like not having a working water heater, but worse.
On September 23rd the crew from Frontz Drilling showed up. In order to get the rig in, we had had to cut down the maple tree by the drive, grind the stump down below grade, and remove the low fence along the drive with the electric outlets and the post light.
I came home for lunch at noon, and they were already down over 65 feet. When I came home at 5 PM, they were wrapping up their operation : the hole was 135 feet deep, cased in 120 feet of 5 inch PVC.
The next day the pump crew came in and installed the pump, set it up with the 86 gallon pressure tank, and chlorinated the system.
I was up at 5 AM, purging the system, and when I could no longer smell chlorine, I turned on the water heater. A half hour later, I enjoyed a hot shower before going to work. The Health Department took the water sample on the 30th, and on the 3rd we were told that everything was OK. I opened the valves for the softener. Frontz had tested the water for hardness; the new well was not as hard as the old one.
| Hardness | 5 gpg |
| Iron | o.4 ppm |
| pH | 7.1 |
| Manganese | 0 ppm |
| Hydrogen Sulfide | 0.2 ppm |
| Total Dissolved Solids | 790 ppm |
While they had noted a trace of hydrogen sulfide, there does not seem to be any noticeable iron or sulfur in the water. Thank God for that; clear, pure water at 12 gallons per minute for a half hour with no draw-down.
So, for the curious, I suppose I ought to recap the events of the past several months. My employment has been a concern for quite a while (ever since Charter One was sold to RBS and REAS was spun off to NASCO and they closed the operation in March 2005). We survived (barely) under self-employment, but I was constantly sending out resumes and applying for openings that showed up.
On April 16 I received a call from a temp agency in California asking if I was interested in a Review Appraiser position in Akron -- the recruiter had spotted my resume on the internet. On April 17 I started my first 8-5 job in over three years. I would be working for the temp agency for the first 13 weeks, and then, if I had performed satisfactorily, would be offered a permanent position.
It turned out that the company I would work for was planning to expand its valuation services, but at the moment had a need for a certified appraiser to do quality control reviews on Broker Price Opinions (BPOs). Basically, the job was making sure all the blanks were properly filled in. The Appraisal Standards Board FAQ #198 ("I am an appraiser and my practice includes requests to comment on a wide range of valuation work performed by others. Sometimes this work is presented as an appraisal report, appraisal consulting report, consulting report, market data summary, and even as a broker’s price opinion. When does STANDARD 3 apply?") states that,
"Assignments related to consulting reports, market data summaries, and broker’s price opinions are not appraisal reviews. Even when the work under examination is performed by an appraiser, evaluating these types of work is not part of an appraisal review.
However, even if the service is not an appraisal review, the portions of USPAP that apply generally to appraisal practice, (i.e., DEFINITIONS, PREAMBLE, the Conduct, Management, and Confidentiality sections of the ETHICS RULE, the COMPETENCY RULE and the JURISDICTIONAL EXCEPTION RULE) would apply."
Standard 3 would not be applicable. I was comfortable with that.
Several weeks into the job, I was notified that plans were afoot to expand the responsibilities of the BPO auditors (we used that term so as to avoid misconceptions about the scope of our work) to "reconcile" BPOs and appraisals. The software that the company was using provided an on-line form which was filled out by the real estate agent doing the BPO. Once the form had been audited to make sure all the necessary information was there, and the specific client guidelines for the report had been followed, the software turned it into a PDF format report which was sent to the client. The report was not signed; a space at the bottom stated "Signature on File".
At that point there were two other appraisers doing the same thing I was doing. We discussed the implications and I studied the Standards. My conclusion was that, using the current software, it was not possible for licensed appraisers to legally and ethically do the "reconciliations". To do so would move the work into the category of an appraisal review.
Again from FAQ #198, "The answer to this question lies in the definition of an 'appraisal review:' the act or process of developing and communicating an opinion about the quality of another appraiser’s work that was performed as part of an appraisal, appraisal review, or appraisal consulting assignment.
For this question, the key features of an appraisal review are: - the work under review was performed by an appraiser, and
- the work under review was performed as part of an appraisal, appraisal review, or appraisal consulting assignment.
If a service satisfies the definition of appraisal review, STANDARD 3 applies. Assignments involving commenting on the quality of appraisal reports and appraisal consulting reports are appraisal reviews.
Standard 3 of USPAP sets out the conditions governing an appraisal review and its reporting. At minimum, to meet the Standard, the scope of the review would be determined by the client and the reviewer, but would have to be stated in the report. The signature of the reviewer would have to be under his/her exclusive control. The appraiser would have to maintain (for at least 5 years) the workfile containing true copies (meaning copies of the reports as received from and submitted to the client) of both the work under review and the review itself. Finally, the signed certification as required by Standard 3-2 would have to be attached as an integral part of the report.
I discussed these concerns with my supervisors and also with one of the vice presidents of the company. I would have no objection to doing the "reconciliations" if the software could be altered to allow conformance with Standard 3, and, I put forward suggestions as to how that could be done (it would be a very simple process of adding addendum pages to the PDF formatted reports). I was told that there were no plans to alter the software.
In mid-July, at the 13 week point, I had a performance review. At that time I was informed that because of my concerns over the "reconciliation" process, I was not going to be hired as permanent staff. I was, however, retained as a BPO auditor.
The amount of work fluctuated over the summer; in September, a new client came on board and by this time our department had 6 licensed appraisers and 1 real estate agent reviewing the BPOs. For two weeks in mid-September, we all worked overtime. Then the work slowed. People were asked to volunteer to go home during the day because there wasn't enough work. The week ending 9-27 I was able to put in 33.75 hours, the week ending 10-4, 23.25 hours, and my last week, 31.75 hours.
On Friday, 10-10, I was asked to go home at 3 PM since there wasn't enough work to go around. My team leader signed my time sheet, and checked the box that said my assignment would continue the next week. About 7 PM I got a phone call from the temp agency in California, informing me that my supervisor had called and said that I was being let go because "the numbers were not high enough". I have checked the local job postings all week; it appears that no effort has been made to recruit someone to replace me.
So... the LORD gives, and the LORD takes away. Blessed be the Name of the LORD. Its time to start a new adventure.
Where have I been? Busy. As of tonight, I will not be quite so busy. I got a phone call saying my 8-5 job was over. Officially, it was because of numbers -- production not high enough. Unofficially, ...
Well, I have some things to finish up around here. Maybe do more high-power blogging. We'll see.
