Let The Borrower Pick The Appraiser

[J Grant]

D-" There is no hidden profits here. AMCs have to make a profit to stay in business. The lender is not allowing the AMC to make an exorbitant level (although, as I say, few believe that); if one AMC is making too much money by charging too much, another will step in and take its place.An AMCs profit margin is similar (and on the lower end) than any other service-type organization. 15-25% pre-tax"

My argument is not with AMC's per se. Yes they need to make a profit, BUT LET THEIR PROFIT COME FROM LENDERS PAYING FOR THEIR SERVICE, NOT BY TAKING PART OF THE BORROWER PAID APPRAISAL FEE.

The AMC can make as little or as much profit margin as they can command, as long as the lender pays for their service. If lender needs to recoup the AMC service cost from borrower, let them roll the managing fee into the mortgage loan /closing the way they do with so many other fees.

 

[djd09]

Let's ask coester what he thinks about the borrower picking the appraiser?

 

[J Grant]

D- "A lot of people can argue against increasing fees when there are appraisers willing to take less (and that main argument will come from the consumer advocates/stakeholders; because lenders and AMCs will get their cut regardless)."

Why should lenders and AMC's get their cut from appraisal fees? Lenders should charge for/pay appraisal management service , just like every other business pays for its services . The appraisal fee commensurate to hours spent by appraiser is the lowest associated with a loan, and even without a cut barely enough at times, why should they take a cut from it?

You can argue their taking cut is fine as long as minimum standards are met.. I did point out a conflict of interest existing which can make the fulfillment of minimum standards questionable. That aside, I can understand the minimum standards argument. However, since you are aware via this board feedback, and attrition in the profession and that few are willing to train,, and associated proposed rollback of education since stakeholders predict finding educated people to work for such low pay/poor conditions difficult, how can you argue that lenders and AMC's taking a cut, which results in reduced fees, which then drives out experienced and competent from the field how can you argue that is good for the profession, for borrowers, for the public trust, for the secondary market?

Especially when it could easily be fixed with lenders paying / charging the cost of servicing appraisal separately/ They can recoup it if they want at closing/rolled into the loan with the other fees. they charge. A livable wage appraisal fee is commensurate with VA fee schedule as a base. Allowing the AMC/lender to take a cut has reduced fees to appraisers far below the VA fee schedule in many cases.

 

[hastalavista]

A livable wage appraisal fee is commensurate with VA fee schedule as a base.

Ahhh.... that is what your argument is about. A "livable wage". Well, there is no counterargument within that context unless it achieves that objective, and I cannot guarantee that minimum standards will be met if a so-called livable wage is paid just as I cannot guarantee that minimum standards will not be met if the fee paid is less than your or any others' livable wage benchmark might be.
I can guarantee that if minimum standards are required and enforced, then regardless what the fee is (which I think would move up, but maybe not), all stakeholders will be getting what they require, need, and want. And appraisers will set their fee based on that standard.

(ok, I'll really, really try to post no more on this! )

 

[Eli]

Ahhh.... that is what your argument is about. A "livable wage". Well, there is no counterargument within that context unless it achieves that objective, and I cannot guarantee that minimum standards will be met if a so-called livable wage is paid just as I cannot guarantee that minimum standards will not be met if the fee paid is less than your or any others' livable wage benchmark.
I can guarantee that if minimum standards are required and enforced, then regardless what the fee is (which I think would move up, but maybe not), all stakeholders will be getting what they require, need, and want. And appraisers will set their fee based on that standard.

(ok, I'll really, really try to post no more on this! )

I always knew you could be persuaded. I figured it would take a female to do it.

I joke but it is unreal how much control the government has on private business prices for public trust. Almost all business including lemonade stands. The system driving some of my idols from the profession is sad for the public.

 

[Eli]

You can unlike Denis. You knew I was going to edit it. Lol

 

[hastalavista]

You can unlike Denis. You knew I was going to edit it. Lol

No; I'll keep the like on your post.
I took your post to mean that no matter what facts I present or logic I use to present them, I should really, really, really stay out of these discussions because it doesn't matter. The argument is all about fees.

 

[J Grant]

Fair enough...I made my case...I don't think it's a matter of that AMC's don't' deserve a profit, It's that their profit should come from lender paying the service charge, recouping it form borrower or loan proceeds.

Min standards...we've been over that. Some good exchanges here imo.

 

[Eli]

No; I'll keep the like on your post.
I took your post to mean that no matter what facts I present or logic I use to present them, I should really, really, really stay out of these discussions because it doesn't matter. The argument is all about fees.

Yeah I think the AF pretty much agrees with you.

 

[Eli]

Fair enough...I made my case...I don't think it's a matter of that AMC's don't' deserve a profit, It's that their profit should come from lender paying the service charge, recouping it form borrower or loan proceeds.

Min standards...we've been over that. Some good exchanges here imo.

It's your charm. Face it. Denis can't take it.