Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[Jonsey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jonsey
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.

[quote DW]Yes, they exist. I had to file one when I joined the ASB.

Tick-tock.

Steven, If the tick-tock is referring to my statement because a response was provided by DW.....

Show me where it was written as to when I would make the post go away.

 

[Workbox]

Quote:


Steven, If the tick-tock is referring to my statement because a response was provided by DW.....

Show me where it was written as to when I would make the post go away.

You should write USPAP.

 

[Fred]

Show me where it was written as to when I would make the post go away.

Fool me once? Yeah, like that's ever gonna happen. Hardly the first time I called a bluff.

 

[Jonsey]

Fool me once? Yeah, like that's ever gonna happen. Hardly the first time I called a bluff.

Tick-tock.

 

[Bearslide]

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? No arguement that alamode is a for profit company. However, I have NEVER had a client try to coerce me into using alamode software. I HAVE had numerous clients try to coerce me into using AIReady and Lighthouse. Funny thing - those same lenders use FNC, and those same lenders are in trouble. One wonders if they relied just a little too much on the data provided by FNC............

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. Yes, many of us have fears - and the questions are not being answered. The main question, I believe, was why can an appraiser not save and print, and thus produce, a true copy of AIReady reports?

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. Not to worry - I imagine the ASC will come down from on high and stomp them into submission, just as they did on the driveby issue.



Why? To protect appraisers. Which appraisers? I certainly don't feel protected.

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. Creating WHAT standard? The standard that does not allow appraisers to know for sure what it is they sent? The standard that allows reports to be shifted, sliced and diced?

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. The point is not which software company you use - the point is the AIReady conversion being forced down our throats, for which the appraiser must pay. Or am I mistaken on that? Is the AIReady software available at no charge? Someone in this picture is making money off of it, and it is NOT the appraisers being coerced into using it.

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.

Yes - and an awful lot of appraisals that cannot be produced by the appraisers who wrote them. If anyone were truly interested in"standards" it would be a standard of signature security - but I notice no one is on board for THAT. Tells me reams.

 

[Workbox]

This is the Coercion I got from a BK lender to sign up to AP, when for 6-7 months was sending it PDF and the processors told me it did not matter which way they received it. Many more received this when they had an established client for at least 10 year. And yes, they told us that we would get more work this way. Not.

From: Phil Cavero
To: XXXXXXXXX
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006

: Appraisal Port Link (American Home Mortgage/HomeGate)


PLEASE RESPOND WITH ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF RECEIPT OF THIS EMAIL

Dear XXXXXXX,

Thank you for signing up with HomeGate Settlement Services. It is very important that you are linked to us through the Appraisal Port system. All appraisers that are not linked directly to HomeGate through the Appraisal Port system will have their approval status with HomeGate and American Home Mortgage reconsidered. Please contact Appraisal Port at 888-963-3330 and give them your personal key number, which is PK# XXXXXX (Please note, that the PK# can not be entered on the AP website as the Registration Key #). After providing the customer rep. with the PK#, they will then give you your online registration key. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns.

Phil Cavero
Vendor Manager - Region 3 (AR, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, MI, MN, MO, NE, OK, SD, TN, TX, WI)
HomeGate Settlement Services
520 Broadhollow Road
Melville, NY 11747
Toll Free ----- 800-795-2377 x 2467
Fax ------------ 866-630-6842
phil.cavero@americanhm.com

Yeah, it works, ........ how many that use AP are out of business or on the verge of it?
It really hurts loosing them after working with this client for 7 years. I am not saying it was all their fault, but their was some fast and cheap dynamics that were introduced that lead to this situation.

 

[peturner]

I have honestly and thoroughly tried to wade through all of the posts, statements, arguments, and positions of many of you whom I consider to be strong and committed fellow professional real estate appraisers. I have been involved with the State Board for many years. I am involved now as many of you know. I am going through a very long thought process and with that comes many questions within my heart and mind.
I understand the purpose of Title XXI, FIRREA, and, I believe, the INTENT and MEANING of USPAP......HOWEVER, I do have an open enough mind to listen to honest and objective responses.
HOWEVER, Does USPAP outline specific disciplinary steps mandating the type and degree that the States are to follow? Is USPAP a perfect document? Does TAF dictate with a heavy hand what is to be done?
MY answer I have come up with is somewhat from a personal AND professional perspective.
I have not seen anywhere in USPAP where it tells the States HOW to implement OR ENFORCE that document. It is an ambiguous document at best, and perhaps intentionally so. If it can be agreed that it is somewhat ambiguous, if it can be agreed that interpreting and enforcing it lies within the
States....then it seems to me that it is not only the States' rights to enforce it on each and every level....then it must be up to the States to interpret it....utilizing ALL available resources available to ensure everyones' rights...To cloud our issue there are GSE guidelines....and there are individual States' Regulations and Rules....all guided by, but not DICATATED to by USPAP as some might argue. If each State acts with responsibility and guided by their own rules and regs...I cannot see where the TAF can condemn any well-thought out action by an individual State. I look forward to honest, objective positions that I am SURE many of you have in our many challenges as we go forward.

 

[DWiley]

If anyone were truly interested in"standards" it would be a standard of signature security - but I notice no one is on board for THAT. Tells me reams.

Digital signatures standards already exist. However, it is up to the appraiser, not the user, to apply them. I have encouraged their use for a long time. If nothing else comes from this thread. I hope it leads some appraisers to look into real digital signatures.

I sent a file with a real digital signature through AppraisalPort on Friday. Nothing prevents an appraiser who wants to better secure their reports from doing so.

I agree that all forms software that has the AIReady option should allow both viewing and printing. That just makes sense. As I said before, I will be VERY suprised if this is not added very soon.

Over the years there have been many technilogical changes that have made it faster/easier for lenders and appraisers to communicate. In most cases appraisers have been slow to adapt. When I hear the gnashing of teeth over portals and AIReady I am reminded of past events and similar comments made about other changes.

"A lender shouldn't be able to MAKE me get a fax machine."

"A lender shouldn't be able to MAKE me use digital photographs"

"A lender shouldn't be able to MAKE me email my reports."
​

Portals centrailze things for lenders and appraisers. With portals neither appraisers nor lenders have to track multiple email addresss. AIReady files are much easier for lenders to review and process than PDF files. That is the simple reason that AIReady is becoming more widespread. Can the reports be "sliced and diced?" Sure, but that capability has been there since the invention of the copy machine and scanning devices.

Lenders cannot make appraisers change. We still have an "old timer" in our area who refuses to email reports. That is his choice, but he then has no right to complain about lenders that won't work with him because he refuses to modernize.

 

[Jonsey]

1234567890

 

[DWiley]

I look forward to honest, objective positions that I am SURE many of you have in our many challenges as we go forward.

Most of the difficulty lies in gaining the technical knowledge to actually understand the matters at hand and then, if rules are crafted, doing so without big unintended consequences. It is important that board members fully research the matter, and not just rely on accusations made by competitors.

Failure to gain that knowledge can lead to proposed rules like those in Georgia. Anyone with an ounce of understanding can see that their proposal would be disasterous.

As we say in this part of the world, the States have a "tough row to hoe" in this matter.

Best Wishes

DW