Independent Appraisers GSE/Cuomo Proposal 3/19/08

[George W Dodd]

1234567891

 

[JT1974]

Just remember that emailing your representatives is worthless. If you plan to send them anything, be sure to send a "hard copy" via first class USPS. Phone calls help some when they get thousands of calls on the same topic, but an old fashioned letter is still the best way to go.

 

[panappr]

I must say this is a piece of work, however, IMHO the tiered review may bring this proposal to its knees, if accepted. With the added cost of providing and implementing this, it will require and enormous staff of qualified reviewers???. I am as anxious as everyone to see the their response. And thank you Pam (and all of you) for your valuable time as well as your insight and perceptions on what needs to be accomplished with this proposal.

 

[Crunch Hardtack]

A good start, however, "Establish and maintain adherence to the Home Valuation Code of Conduct". I would not do that until the scummy AMC's have been eliminated from the HVCC.

Also, "2. Only the IVPI approved appraiser can perform the appraisal." Opens up the possibility for way too much abuse (ala MARI). An appraisal is an opinion. Unless an appraiser has received a significant sanction (and I mean more than a minor technical violation) they should be approved. The review process as well as complaints to the appropriate state board will weed out the skippies.

Headquartes need to be near DC so some lobbying can get done.

 

[moh malekpour]

Kudos to IVPI organizational committee. This is an excellent work and a huge step. It is a consensus proposal as all constructive ideas, opinions and suggestions that were posted by appraisers recently on the forum about this subject are incorporated. It is not one-person proposal. It is appraisers proposal. I know most of what I asked in one of my earlier posts are there with some modifications http://appraisersforum.com/showthread.php?t=135409&page=5#43 except the budget for the operation that I thought it should be paid by the percentage of appraisers fees but the committee wants to be paid by lenders. It is even better if lenders take the tab but they may balk.

This proposal is an ideal solution to appraisal problem. We couldn’t ask for more. We hope they will incorporate it in the Home Valuation Code of Conduct if they really want to improve the system and if they didn’t and the system didn’t improve, we can tell them that we tried.

We should now follow it up by sending them the endorsement letter. The easiest way to do it is to copy and paste the letter in the comment box on implementation of the Code , check mark all of the above box below the comment box, fill out the other information and submit it online to each one of those who already have the proposal. We cannot sign and date the letter online but if we send it via the comment box, our names and emails will go with it.

I haven’t done it yet. It is only a suggestion and should be approved by the committee.

 

[Brad Ellis]

George,

Thanks for your response. Before I comment further, I do wish to applaud you and Pam and Mike and George and those who must have spent much time on it- so please take my comments as constructive vs. carping.

I raised the issues I did (I have not at all "studied" it) since they jumped off the page at me. It looks like it is a pre-sanctioned document (hence the letterhead question) that remains unanswered.

George, trust me on this- I knew fully the part of the HVCC that mentioned the 10%. I probably have given as much thought to this as have any of you. I note that you declined to highlight the other part of that sentence..."(or other bona fiede statistically significant percentage)..."

But that is NOT the reason I asked. The reason I asked was because I wonder if any of the committee actually knows just how many reviews would have to be done?

So- do any of you know that?

Do any of you know the numbers? I do.

That part of the proposal will not work. Sorry.

Brad

 

[dobie]

I have only made it through page 10, but there are a few things I would like to have some clarification on:

First, on page 2, the word creditable is used. Is that the right word? Should it be credible?

Bothered me too so I looked it up. It is a word and probably fits given the context but I prefer "credible".

That's all.

 

[Beth Stevens]

Okay.I'll bite.

Brad,

How many reviews would need to be done? Why won't that part of the proposal work?

 

[PropertyEconomics]

Why would someone be removed from the panel prior to issuance of a finding by the State board? Isnt that being found guilty prior to having the information presented? This part of the proposal is very disturbing. What power would any committee have to compel an appraiser to appear before them?
The power suggested by the proposal is very far reaching and honestly appears to be well beyond the scope of the organization.
I realize this is prepared to promote competent appraisers in an unpressured environment and I applaud that. But it is another level of power held over an appraisers head. How is this any different than being removed from an approved appraisal list because of something you have done that the AMC didnt like? While there may be more checks and balances in this system, the business model looks very similar to those already in existence that appraisers are so afraid of?

States dont remove an appraiser from being able to perform work in the interium of their review, findings, and decision ... realizing that board decisions can take months and sometimes a year or more to be finalized.

 

[Terry McCulloch]

It's a great proposal. I'm endorsing it.

I'm blown away by the depth and breadth of the proposals. It's a huge undertaking.

terry & Ion,

Send it to all the links in mike's post where you found the link to the proposal.

I'm okay with the comment emails to all addresses provided but where do I send the signed endorsement. Can't find a way to send a .pdf to Cuomo's office through the provided email address? Just want to make sure that my voice is heard and raised hand acknowledged.