Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[woodyva]

I thin the letters from FNMA and the AI speak volumes. What do you guys think?

 

[Bearslide]

I thin the letters from FNMA and the AI speak volumes. What do you guys think?

I would hope it means Fannie is reconsidering forcing the use of AIReady software. I would hope it means that people may be starting to understand and rethink the implications of this software. I would hope that Fannie and everyone else would be geared more to security - signature security, such as Couch shared.

And if I had my druthers, I would hope it would mean that "appraiser independance" includes NOT dictating what software an appraiser is to use to create and deliver their reports.

As far as the letter from AI - which letter? If you're referring to the letter that went out denying ownership in FNC, doesn't really matter - I suspect it's all smoke and mirrors, forked tongues and CYA anyway. Lack of ownership does not preclude under the table toe groping and bedroom sheet snatching.

 

[woodyva]

This question is aimed towards Danny Wiley an dany others that can possibly answer.

Wayne Pugh, someone I do not hold in any negative light, states in his letter that there is misinformation being spread by folks who wish to gain financial benefit from it. Who is standing to gain anything?

There is also some narative about not receiving any royalties from FNC. Why would an organization go into a deal like this and not get something for it? This does not add up in my mind.

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

Maybe the AI members 'involved' set up separate companies to move the money into?

I know there have been insinuations about me planning to rip off appraisers if I could just take over - although I will state specifically here and now that I never had, nor do I now have any intentions of running any existing or not yet formed company. There are many much more qualified than me ready, willing, and very able to do that that I would happily endorse. Money is not my God, although it appears that more than a few want to make it seem that it is. I don't know... maybe money is their God and they cannot comprehend that there really are people that don't worship at the altar of the almight dollar no matter who gets hurt along the way.

People like Woody Fincham, George Dodd, Pat Turner, and others of similar ethics and strong character are my heros. I have no use or respect for those that appear to think there is nothing wrong with stabbing others in the back for their own personal gain.

 

[Workbox]

Maybe it is overseas, or it's a matter of having Home Keys for listed homes.

 

[DWiley]

Wayne Pugh, someone I do not hold in any negative light, states in his letter that there is misinformation being spread by folks who wish to gain financial benefit from it. Who is standing to gain anything?

Follow the smoke and you will find the fire. Is it a coincidence that the entity stirring the embers on this issue is the for-profit company that also developed its own XML standard? More to the point, is this really a battle over appraisers’ rights, or is it merely a marketing strategy of a for profit company?

Like Pam, I have a deep respect for the ethical appraisers who promote and fight for our profession. I do not respect those promulgating misleading disclaimers designed to play on appraisers’ fears and lack of technical knowledge. It may be good business, but it is bad ethics, and it could be very bad for our profession.

One has to look no further than the proposed Georgia rules to see how bad kneejerk reactions based on fear can be. If I were a cynical man I suppose I would root for the Georgia rules to pass exactly as drafted just so I could see the look on the Board members’ faces when someone turned them all in the first time they emailed an appraisal report in PDF format.

There is also some narative about not receiving any royalties from FNC. Why would an organization go into a deal like this and not get something for it? This does not add up in my mind.

Why? To protect appraisers.

Despite claims to the contrary, AIReady was developed mostly by a group of residential appraisers. Most of the rest of the mortgage world has XML standards as well. It was clear that appraisal reports would be included in the XML world at some point.

By creating the standard, and providing it with no royalty, the AI protected appraisers from being forced to any single vendor, or from paying royalties to a single vendor. Had a for-profit company promulgated the standard it is highly unlikely that company would have waived royalties as the AI did.

Sure you can use Wayne Pugh’s company to send AIReady reports (though he was not the first to implement it). You could also use Mr. Biggers’ company or Mr. Opelka’s or several others.

AI does not receive royalties, but it does get something. It gets brand enforcement in all AIReady materials. FNC’s numbers say that in 2007 over 1.3 million AIReady files were uploaded to lenders. That is a lot of branding.

 

[Jonsey]

Follow the smoke and you will find the fire. Is it a coincidence that the entity stirring the embers on this issue is the for-profit company that also developed its own XML standard? More to the point, is this really a battle over appraisers’ rights, or is it merely a marketing strategy of a for profit company?

Why? To protect appraisers.

One has to look no further than the proposed Georgia rules to see how bad kneejerk reactions based on fear can be. If I were a cynical man I suppose I would root for the Georgia rules to pass exactly as drafted just so I could see the look on the Board members’ faces when someone turned them all in the first time they emailed an appraisal report in PDF format.

Despite claims to the contrary, AIReady was developed mostly by a group of residential appraisers. Most of the rest of the mortgage world has XML standards as well. It was clear that appraisal reports would be included in the XML world at some point.

By creating the standard, and providing it with no royalty, the AI protected appraisers from being forced to any single vendor, or from paying royalties to a single vendor. Had a for-profit company promulgated the standard it is highly unlikely that company would have waived royalties as the AI did.

Sure you can use Wayne Pugh’s company to send AIReady reports (though he was not the first to implement it). You could also use Mr. Biggers’ company or Mr. Opelka’s or several others.

AI does not receive royalties, but it does get something. It gets brand enforcement in all AIReady materials. FNC’s numbers say that in 2007 over 1.3 million AIReady files were uploaded to lenders. That is a lot of branding.

For the good of which group of Appraisers?

Sorry. Lets cut to the chase. That Biggers is the CEO of a FOR PROFIT is indisputable and NOT the issue. The conflict of interest and seeds of suspicion were sown when the AIRD originated, was rejected by membership, failed, sold and subsequently negotiated the residual rights to benefit (cash) from stock options when FNC goes public. But hey, you know what they say - there's more than one way to skin a cat.

In another thread you're speaking AI (NON PROFIT) Code of Ethics and in this thread is mentioned an AI President owning a software company that serves AI ready in the same breath?

How about revising that AI Code of Ethics to include the filing of Financial Disclosure Statements to serve as evidence that there are no conflicts be it a publically appointed or elected official's financial interests and his/her public office.

The purpose of requiring a financial disclosure is to help insure that those people who are acting in the public interest, director, officer, partner, trustee or management do not use their public positions to further their private financial interests.

Every public office held to should include a Financial Disclosure. For instance, if you are a member of a municipal board, but also serve on other committees, municipal or state, whether as a regular member, or ex-officio, those offices must also be listed on the Financial Disclosure.

Same should absolutely be applicable to TAF (NON PROFIT), and any other Appraiser Regulatory agencies.

Why? To protect other appraisers.

Tell me that Financial Disclosure is an existing, mandatory prerequisite for elected/appointed Org officials charged with upholding public trust I will make this post go away.

 

[DWiley]

Tell me that Financial Disclosure is an existing, mandatory prerequisite for elected Org officials charged with upholding public trust I will make this post go away.

Yes, they exist. I had to file one when I joined the ASB. As for Mr. Pugh, his involvement in a software company was widely disclosed before his election.

 

[Fred]

Tell me that Financial Disclosure is an existing, mandatory prerequisite for elected Org officials charged with upholding public trust I will make this post go away.

Yes, they exist. I had to file one when I joined the ASB.

Tick-tock.

 

[Workbox]

Yes, they exist. I had to file one when I joined the ASB. As for Mr. Pugh, his involvement in a software company was widely disclosed before his election.

Great, good, perfectomundo................BUT WE ARE NOT STUPID.......Pleeeese.