Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[Couch Potato]

BTW "utterly stupid" and "mouthpiece" fit together nicely​

An apt summation of your post.

 

[woodyva]

You know something else sort of popped in my mind this evening. We have had 2 very significant lenders, American Home and Indy Mac, both go out of business, and very quickly. Both of these companies had something in common: they used Appraisal Port. Not that AP is at all responsible, but perhaps these QC applications really are not all that impressive. Most likely it is a major coincidence, but who knows?

 

[woodyva]

Mr. Wiley:

I know you had some early on interaction with FNC and you were a part of the AIRD. I imagine you had some exposure to Ross' intentions with the AI and moving on with partnering up with FNC without the desire to do so of the membership base in the AI. Since the AIRD stopped, and essentially FNC took it over or at least the spirit of it; why do you think the AI was hell bent on doing the licensing of AI Ready. I have spoken to many, many appraisers and have yet to find a single one that supported the move.

I am certainly not doing like others here have in that I am saying you were privy to anything wrong, or did anything wrong. I respect your opinion and thoughts.

 

[George W Dodd]

CP,
Read the certifications that are signed as part of using the 3/05 URAR. Read Fannie's guidelines. Read USPAP. Read your state's rules & regs. If you use AIReady (or other conversions) you are not sending an appraisal report, you are sending a data file. But the data by itself does not constitute an appraisal report. What has been sent? Look at what Fannie states in its supplemental requirements.
There are several easy alternatives that are possible:
1. The Appraiser sends the file in pdf and then the client converts it into whatever they like.
2. The file is sent in pdf with a second part sent as a data file.
3. The data file includes a complete copy of the appraisal in pdf.

When the appraiser is required to convert the file before sending it, when the appraiser is fully liable for what is sent, but has absolutely no control over what parts of the report are converted and which are not then something stinks. There is a reason they want to hang the conversion on the appraiser.
Just because the client wants something doesn't mean it's appropriate for the appraiser to provide it.
It's unfortunate that there are some in this profession that will do anything for personal gain. It's even more unfortunate that this greed is rewarded.

 

[Fred]

Debating what actually is a true copy sounds too much like debating what the definition of "is" is.

And yet such distinction determine whether someone is guilty or innocent.

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

CP,
Read the certifications that are signed as part of using the 3/05 URAR. Read Fannie's guidelines. Read USPAP. Read your state's rules & regs. If you use AIReady (or other conversions) you are not sending an appraisal report, you are sending a data file. But the data by itself does not constitute an appraisal report. What has been sent? Look at what Fannie states in its supplemental requirements.
There are several easy alternatives that are possible:
1. The Appraiser sends the file in pdf and then the client converts it into whatever they like.
2. The file is sent in pdf with a second part sent as a data file.
3. The data file includes a complete copy of the appraisal in pdf.

When the appraiser is required to convert the file before sending it, when the appraiser is fully liable for what is sent, but has absolutely no control over what parts of the report are converted and which are not then something stinks. There is a reason they want to hang the conversion on the appraiser.
Just because the client wants something doesn't mean it's appropriate for the appraiser to provide it.
It's unfortunate that there are some in this profession that will do anything for personal gain. It's even more unfortunate that this greed is rewarded.

I hope all read this over and over again until it's fully understood, especially the part I bolded.

 

[Carnivore]

You know something else sort of popped in my mind this evening. We have had 2 very significant lenders, American Home and Indy Mac, both go out of business, and very quickly. Both of these companies had something in common: they used Appraisal Port. Not that AP is at all responsible, but perhaps these QC applications really are not all that impressive. Most likely it is a major coincidence, but who knows?

woodyva,

That is indeed the major problem for the lenders as I see it. The Rules Set QC function that FNC creates and I believe custom taylors for each client is an utter failure from a regulatory point of view, IMO. The FRT lenders are responsible for the QC of the appraisals they receive. I hardly think that total reliance on a automated rule set fits the bill. It certainly can not detect much in the way of fraud.

From what I understand the rule sets detect and identify variances outside a pre-determined norm. For example, if your gross, net and line adjustments exceed Fannie Mae guidelines the FNC process kicks that report out to an exception for reviewer. The live body reviewer then looks over the report for the identified problem. After review I assume the reviewer either gives it a pass because those items exceeded are adequately explained or rejected until those items are explained adequately by the appraiser. Sounds good so far, right? So far I dont really have a problem with it at this point of my post to you. Read on!

What did scald by rear about this system later were the challenges by the reviewer over my reports exceeding variances. My often reply was "Did you read my report?". There often answer was, "yes"! My next question was "What part of my explanation and supporting addendums did you not understand?" There often reply was "What explanation and what supporting addendums are you talking about?" What was happening became clear to me at that point after I would send them the report in PDF format. The FNC conversion software was and still is poorly designed and not able to handle any kind of thorough/extensive report(multipile addendums, maps, drawings, additonal photo pages, etc) . Even on common run of the mill Skippy/trainee 1004 reports the concersion moves verbiage to an addendum YOU THE APPRAISER did not create.

In conclusion one of the REAL PROBLEMS is that the FNC conversion DOES NOT present YOUR REPORT in the manner YOU WANTED or INTENDED it to be PRESENTED. I just dont know how I can be any clearer than that.

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

In conclusion one of the REAL PROBLEMS is that the FNC conversion DOES NOT present YOUR REPORT in the manner YOU WANTED or INTENDED it to be PRESENTED. I just dont know how I can be any clearer than that.

Please note that this happens through numerous other AMCs and NOT just through FNC.

NOBODY really knows how many mortgage files contain a valuation product that is NOT what the appraiser, who's name and signature are on it, produced and sent - or thought s/he sent.

 

[Couch Potato]

CP,
Read the certifications that are signed as part of using the 3/05 URAR. Read Fannie's guidelines. Read USPAP. Read your state's rules & regs. If you use AIReady (or other conversions) you are not sending an appraisal report, you are sending a data file. But the data by itself does not constitute an appraisal report. What has been sent? Look at what Fannie states in its supplemental requirements.
There are several easy alternatives that are possible:
1. The Appraiser sends the file in pdf and then the client converts it into whatever they like.
2. The file is sent in pdf with a second part sent as a data file.
3. The data file includes a complete copy of the appraisal in pdf.

When the appraiser is required to convert the file before sending it, when the appraiser is fully liable for what is sent, but has absolutely no control over what parts of the report are converted and which are not then something stinks. There is a reason they want to hang the conversion on the appraiser.
Just because the client wants something doesn't mean it's appropriate for the appraiser to provide it.
It's unfortunate that there are some in this profession that will do anything for personal gain. It's even more unfortunate that this greed is rewarded.

A PDF is not a report, it is a data file too. Without software to read that data file no report exists. The comments you are applying to AIReady are just as applicable to typical PDF file. That PDF software is ubiquitous does not alter the fact it is the same process. You are aware PDF files look different depending on the program used to view them aren't you?

 

[BRCJR]

We could always go back to snail mail and end this issue-lol