Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[Couch Potato]

Right about now, I guess I'm a lot more concerned about AMCs running rampant, the oversupply of appraisers and what that's doing to the fee structure, and the prospects of a national fee shop selling AVMs disguised as "draft appraisals". Show me something other than a company adding watermarks or printing out salient conclusions cover pages, and I might get as excited as you guys. Other than that, I've got more pressing concerns.

Very well said George, and I share your views. For anyone who wants to get an idea of what the report you are sending really looks like, try opening the file created by your forms software in a text editor. While much of it (pictures, signature and such) will be unreadable gibberish, you should also be able to see how the XML tags work to identify your data. In the clip from a file of mine below it should be noted some of the data present was never entered by me. I did not use all caps for the city in the clients address. I did not spell out the value. These items are some of what exists in the data file. It is the "tag" at the start of the line (##=) that determines when and where a particular part of the file will be placed in what is viewed.

13=521 Plymouth Road
12=521 Plymouth Road, Suite 112, PLYMOUTH MEETING, PA 19462
14=PLYMOUTH MEETING
17=Suite 112, Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462
15=PA
16=19462
270=F13
64=
18=
19=610-260-9700
20=610-834-7479
60=One Hundred and Thirty-Nine Thousand Dollars
360=1999
197=9 yrs
22=139,000

Different file types use different tagging systems. For any file, the program used to view it determines its appearance. As an appraiser we have no control over the actions of others. If the clients choose to view the reports in a text editor, it is their problem they are not seeing what we intended, likewise for any other viewing choice. As long as the client agreed to the file format, the appraiser has done their part when a readable file was sent. Could such a file be easily altered? You bet it could if it is not encrypted. But when encrypted it would be like editing the gibberish sections.

 

[DWiley]

One of the reason's I thought discussing a national vault was proper for this thread is that many feel that is exactly what AI is trying to accomplish with Appraisal Port and their AI Ready software. ...There is many millions of dollars at stake for whoever gets control over a "national database" who can then create the ultimate AVM.

Interesting, especially given that AI has nothing to do with AppraisalPort. Of course, one should never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

FWIW, many at the AI agree with you about the value of a national database. That was the very reason we formed AIRD - to capture that value for the appraiser.

 

[Bearslide]

Interesting, especially given that AI has nothing to do with AppraisalPort. Of course, one should never let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory.

FWIW, many at the AI agree with you about the value of a national database. That was the very reason we formed AIRD - to capture that value for the appraiser.

Shouldn't that read FROM the appraiser?

 

[DWiley]

Shouldn't that read FROM the appraiser?

No. The AIRD would have provided revenue for appraisers. The idea was to create a national database using data voluntarily submitted by appraisers. The appraisers would received 50% of whatever the data could be sold for.

Appraisers decided not to support this concept, but many of those who rejected the idea are now whining because the data is being used without additional compensation. Some are grasping at any straw they can - copyright, true copy, whatever.

Since the Chair of the committee in VA has already filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the company that is the focus of the "fact finding," forgive me if I don't anticipate an unbiased result. It is ironic that the VA board is allegedly looking into the USPAP implications of portals, yet they have turned their back on USPAP's most fundamental principle - objectivity.

 

[Bearslide]

No. The AIRD would have provided revenue for appraisers. The idea was to create a national database using data voluntarily submitted by appraisers. The appraisers would received 50% of whatever the data could be sold for.

Appraisers decided not to support this concept, but many of those who rejected the idea are now whining because the data is being used without additional compensation. Some are grasping at any straw they can - copyright, true copy, whatever.

Since the Chair of the committee in VA has already filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the company that is the focus of the "fact finding," forgive me if I don't anticipate an unbiased result. It is ironic that the VA board is allegedly looking into the USPAP implications of portals, yet they have turned their back on USPAP's most fundamental principle - objectivity.

I won't claim to remember every single communication I ever received regarding appraisals and appraising. But somehow, I don't recall EVER having been asked if I wanted to provide data. Was this offer only extended to AI members?

I find the concept of "they won't willingly give it so we'll take it anyway" interesting.

That said, that does not take away from the true copy and conversion issues.

 

[TJSum]

"Right about now, I guess I'm a lot more concerned about AMCs running rampant, the oversupply of appraisers and what that's doing to the fee structure, and the prospects of a national fee shop selling AVMs disguised as "draft appraisals". Show me something other than a company adding watermarks or printing out salient conclusions cover pages, and I might get as excited as you guys. Other than that, I've got more pressing concerns." From George Hatch


I could not agree more Mr. Hatch. We are focusing on AI Ready with this thread, but my concerns are with all the conversion programs. AI Ready is the main topic because of the Virginia situation and the fact there are some AI Ready "defenders" participating in this discussion. Even though I may disagree with some of their statements, I respect that they are involved in the discussion.

Where are the Lighthouse defenders? Lighthouse seems to take the extra step of not converting the appraisers signature and requiring a new, completely separate signature file. Why? Many AMC's demand usage of Lighthouse or ACI software. Again why? Concerns about AMC's running rampant should include potential changes that could be happening to our reports while the AMC has control of it (with the same software programs) between the actual appraiser and lender.

I also agree one should not disguise true aggendas by attacking these conversion programs with secondary concerns instead of the real ones. I just listed them all from the viewpoint of the average Joe Blow appraiser. There is a rather lengthy list of concerns with these conversion programs with the only apparent benefit of easier automated review processes. It just doesn't add up, and with very little transparency to the process, yes conspiracy theories will run rampant...

 

[TJSum]

No. The AIRD would have provided revenue for appraisers. The idea was to create a national database using data voluntarily submitted by appraisers. The appraisers would received 50% of whatever the data could be sold for.

Appraisers decided not to support this concept, but many of those who rejected the idea are now whining because the data is being used without additional compensation. Some are grasping at any straw they can - copyright, true copy, whatever.

Since the Chair of the committee in VA has already filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against the company that is the focus of the "fact finding," forgive me if I don't anticipate an unbiased result. It is ironic that the VA board is allegedly looking into the USPAP implications of portals, yet they have turned their back on USPAP's most fundamental principle - objectivity.

I am with Bearslide, I don't remember anyone asking me? Why didn't I get that memo ?

Also another "home run" from Bearslide... "I find the concept of "they won't willingly give it so we'll take it anyway" interesting. " But it is even worse than that Bearslide, how about the concept of "they won't willingly give it, so we'll take it anyway and force them to pay a fee to us each time we do".



DWiley, so with this post, are you saying there is more to this AI Ready thing then a better automated review process ???

 

[peturner]

DW,
This is now the third time you have cast a personal aspersion my way. I was willing to remain silent until strike three. You absolutely know better than to make such a statement and/or accusation. Do you not believe I have conferred with both private and public counsel prior to taking such a position as the committe chair? Do you for one second believe I have mentioned any Company by name? This is a general problem for appraisers who have come to me personally to ask how we can explore this situation. Because I am involved and have SOME knowledge do you think I should remove myself from the discussion. Not on you life do I intend to do that. I also will not bend over to veiled statements regarding "unintended consequences" as some on here have eluded to in their posts. Unintended consequences, in my view, include but are not limited to appraisal files being opened and manipulated, AVms utilized by LOs for their OBVIOUS profit andthe current financial meltdown that we are not halfway through with at this point. Why cannot the AVMs be put directly and only in appraisers' hands?
Obviously some are very complacent hiding behind their own objectivities as they sit on TAF Board. Not that you would do anything to harm the appraisal profession. It is very clear that you care about the profession. However, I have stated here and elsewhere what I believe USPAP is and is not. It is not a lender tool to manipulate and spin. Which is what APPEARS to have ocurred.
I am asking the questions that everyone else either does not want asked nor answered.
Just so you and everyone else knows there have been various officials present at all meetings...which by the way have been attended by the public...as a matter of fact I invite you to attend on July 23. Also, your implication is that there are no other members of the Committee or on the Board. Do your research and find out HOW things happen in Virginia. It is open, public, and there are NINE members on the Board. The public gets to speak, even you if you choose to come.
But do not imply the books are cooked, 'cause you aint even close. But I expect the lender defense to keep coming.

 

[George Hatch]

Actually Geroge I may just have that silver bullet. I will let you be the first to see what I believe I have discovered about the process. Right now I can actually show you, but I can not prove just yet what the BIG issue actually is!

All I will say at this point is that FNC is complicit in what I have discovered.

If this proves to be true it will be literally earth shattering from a residential appraisers point of view. It may just possibly explain in part how so many loans that went bad were approved to begin with.

I am willing to share with you privately what I have strong suspeicions about!
Let me know how interested you are in hearing more.

I am no fan of FNC, but I've already developed a reputation in some circles for seeking problems where they don't exist and making mountains out of molehills. I am content to wait until you guys come up with something you think is solid enough to share openly. It wouldn't surprise me if you guys come up with something, but at this point it also wouldn't surprise me if you didn't.

I will say one thing about the AIRD. I am not convinced that giving these companies the option to purchase appraiser data would have inhibited or prevented them from datamining everything that comes in their door. Besides that, I seem to recall that another sticking point for a lot of appraisers was providing access to other appraisers with whom they directly compete. This was the same objection that the commercial appraisers have put forth for not sharing their data with a commercial database.

I suppose we could say that if an appraiser participated in a commercial database they might have a more defensible position if there was some legal dispute about outside datamining. However, my gut feeling is that if the data copyright issue would is resolved on a broad scale that might resolve some of these other issues at the same time.

 

[DWiley]

Was this offer only extended to AI members?

All appraisers could participate. AI members did get a bigger cut. If I recall correctly an AI member got 50% of whatever data he/she contributed could be sold for and a non-AI member got 40%.

I find the concept of "they won't willingly give it so we'll take it anyway" interesting.

As other have pointed out, a national database could be very valuable. The statement authorizing the appraisal report to be sent to a data service has been part of the Fannie Mae form for at least 15 years. I don't see why anyone who had read what they have been signing would be suprised that attempts at assembling big databases is ongoing.