Significant Appraisal Assistance (1004p)

[George Hatch]

Should i email it to TAF?

I think you should try reading it, first.

 

[George Hatch]

Finally we agree (partly ) on something -...though USPAP FAQ says the inspection is included in what is considered contributing significant real property assistance- it is not just "me" /my personal viewpoint..

My objection is to the deceptiveness they are using to facilitate this- it is either an inspection or it is not if it is not. If they say it is not an inspection but rather data collection to avoid being disclosed as contributing per above,, then it should not be called an inspection in the appraisal nor to the borrower nor to the investors buying the loan. You expressed concern about similarity in appearance of 1004P to the 1004 form is not clear which is which, ( I do not recall your exact verbiage), this is along same.

"Hello Mr /Mrs Homeowner I want to make an appointment to do data collecting on your house. ...".What?" goes the homeowner. " I thought it an appraiser was coming out to do an inspection. What is data collection? Who is coming to my house for it? A RE agent? When you said a "licensed trained professional" would be coming over I assumed it was an appraiser"..

Being transparent would open up too many questions...and god forbid a borrower or other vested parties actually be able to figure out what is going on. The regulators seem to be on same track as they decided fee disclosures of splits between AMC and appraiser would be "information overload " and thus kept from a borrower (only those states whose boards require it have it)

How much would you want to bet they will instruct the person making appointment to use the term inspection, and inspection will be used on the appraisal report, yet otherwise call it "data gathering " to avoid significant appraisal assistance disclosures... If that is not spin then I don;t know what is,

The only movement that's been happening on opinions here is that you have conceded certain things of which you were previously sure.

I've already said in the past that I think it's a mistake for Fannie to depict the 1004P as being so similar to a conventional 1004 due to the point that most casual readers won't read the disclosures and will simply proceed on the erroneous assumption that they are the same and that the appraiser invariably *will* come to the same conclusions as if they had personally inspected.

You know and I know the 1004P will not replace the entire 1004 trade. What I think it might do is eat up that percentage of the easiest assignments that are the most profitable for appraisers. That's a very valid concern, but I don't see that as an appraisal standards issue. Nor a liability concern for appraisers so long as they make smart choices about which situations to hold out for the personal inspection and refraining from relying solely on whatever meaningless disclosures Fannie puts into their forms.

One way or another the issue we're facing right now was always an inevitability. It was always going to come about, just that same as the fallout from the massive oversupply the appraisal profession created for itself - and to which some idiots are (amazingly) still contributing to.

 

[djd09]

I think you should try reading it, first.

no need. my sponsors aren't criminals.

 

[George Hatch]

Yeah, but some of the people you've apparently been listening to are idiots.

As for me, I have no sponsors. Nor am I trying to sell anything to appraisers. I just do what I do here out of love.

 

[J Grant]

The only movement that's been happening on opinions here is that you have conceded certain things of which you were previously sure.

I've already said in the past that I think it's a mistake for Fannie to depict the 1004P as being so similar to a conventional 1004 due to the point that most casual readers won't read the disclosures and will simply proceed on the erroneous assumption that they are the same and that the appraiser invariably *will* come to the same conclusions as if they had personally inspected.

You know and I know the 1004P will not replace the entire 1004 trade. What I think it might do is eat up that percentage of the easiest assignments that are the most profitable for appraisers. That's a very valid concern, but I don't see that as an appraisal standards issue. Nor a liability concern for appraisers so long as they make smart choices about which situations to hold out for the personal inspection and refraining from relying solely on whatever meaningless disclosures Fannie puts into their forms.

One way or another the issue we're facing right now was always an inevitability. It was always going to come about, just that same as the fallout from the massive oversupply the appraisal profession created for itself - and to which some idiots are (amazingly) still contributing to.

You are talking now about the appraisal business and not about standards...I appreciate your perspective

Since you believe "that most casual readers won't read the disclosures and will simply proceed on the erroneous assumption that they are the same and that the appraiser invariably *will* come to the same conclusions as if they had personally inspected. "

The deceptiveness about inspections and data collection is along the same lines. The problem is playing field is not level. Appraisers subject to USPAP are held to a high stadnard of scruitny and ethics, while the stakeholders are not subject to it, and in appraisals promote deceptive forms, which you just called dout on the 1004P ), and this is along the same..

If appraisals are to be bifurcated, with a portion done by a non appraiser, then they need to be honest about who did what, what is appraisal practice what is significant, the disclosures etc That might not happen and lending appraisals will enter a new phase of not trust worthy., perhaps that is inevitable but maybe not- up to the agencies and state boards.

I will write to the ASB... I certainly will not base my business around them taking action or choosing ethics over commerce, but I will make the communication.

 

[George Hatch]

I am not "now" talking about the separate business aspects of the situation. I've been doing it all along. I just decline to conflate them as being the same thing or being even marginally related. The oversupply of appraiser productivity is far more closely related to the decline of your business interests than what is and isn't an appraisal.


As I see it our beef is with Fannie, not the ASB. It's their form that might lead to *some* users and some 3rd parties to not realize they are getting less from the appraiser in these assignments. The ASB and USPAP have nothing to do with it.

The bigger challenge here - which we seem to be avoiding - is that some of these primary and secondary market users apparently DO think that getting less from the appraiser is sufficient for these uses. They're apparently not that worried that the value conclusion might not be as reliable.

In other words, our real problem is with our users.

 

[Addie]

Umm...why is this topic 18 pages long?

Should of ended post #2

You do know you get a copy of the inspection report with a name on it right?

“Bill Smith did xxxxxxxxxx”

And case closed. As in end of discussion.

 

[J Grant]

I am not "now" talking about the separate business aspects of the situation. I've been doing it all along. I just decline to conflate them as being the same thing or being even marginally related. The oversupply of appraiser productivity is far more closely related to the decline of your business interests than what is and isn't an appraisal.
As I see it our beef is with Fannie, not the ASB. It's their form that might lead to *some* users and some 3rd parties to not realize they are getting less from the appraiser in these assignments. The ASB and USPAP have nothing to do with it.
The bigger challenge here - which we seem to be avoiding - is that some of these primary and secondary market users apparently DO think that getting less from the appraiser is sufficient for these uses. They're apparently not that worried that the value conclusion might not be as reliable.
In other words, our real problem is with our users.

it our beef is with Fannie, not the ASB.- imo it is both. it is the lack of clarification in USPAP-( ASB) about disclosures / inspection/ significant appraisal assistance etc that allows the deceptive form.

The fact that fannie approves of and designed a deceptive form is telling Fanie used to represent a higher standard of public trust- their prior forms and standards demonstrate that

True our problems are with our users- they always were. But it has risen to a new level now since consumer protection and regulation are being dismantled, which includes appraisals Not all users want that, but the ones who do have fannie's ear.

 

[George Hatch]

There is no user who is compelled to settle for less than what they consider to be meaningful to their decision making. The term "scope creep" has been around in our business for a long time and that scope creep is 100% user-driven.

That's not a USPAP issue unless you think that the role of appraisal standards is to protect RE equity from the underwriting standards of the lenders.

 

[glenn walker]

So I guess before computers there was no such thing as data ? How about those thousands of old file cabinets we have in the basement of the county assessors office or in local building departments. What if I make photo copies and use that information I guess that's not data ? God thousands of years of pre-computer information down the drain. BUT NOPE it's not data unless it is on a computer.

Now let's go to significant assistance we have those on the forum who interpret this as being anyone else that physically inspects , measures and takes photos BUT USPAP is clear saying that it applies if another appraiser is doing that work ?

A non-licensed person who was not engaged by the appraiser is simply providing data and information and if they play no part in assisting in the development of a final opinion of market value they have no more and in some cases less impact then what information I use from my local MLS and agents. Say I use 5 sale's comparables and all my adjustments are based on what the Realtor reported in their listing ? So I assume whoever measured the house knew what the hell they were doing ? I then depend on the MLS Interior photos to help establish the condition adjustments and I read the agents comments to glean other information. So I am depending on other non-appraisers data and information ? Do I have to report them as contributing significant assistance ? WHY NOT I just adjusted 5-comparables all based on secondary sources and In many cases I have no idea if the Realtors provided accurate data and information. What about those photo shopped interior photos- What condition was that bad boy really in ?

So based on my daily use of data and information provided by local Realtors why would a third party inspection on a Hybrid be any more or any less significant assistance ? If so then we are really screwed because now we need to list every listing agents name license number and declare that without their data and information we could not have arrived at a OMV and that seems fairly significant to me.

Comp-1 MLS#IV19692 - MLS shows 2,000 Sq.Ft- two story-4 bedrooms-3 baths-and the agents comments stated the interior was recently remodeled with a kitchen that featured granite counter tops-viking commercial stainless steel appliances and solid oak wood cabinetry. The agent also stated there was a large family room addition with permits but county records did not show it so her husband measured the house. We asked her if he was a licensed appraiser and she said no he drives a UPS truck but he measures large shipping containers from 6:Am to 10:AM with a 100 foot cloth tape and he has a Home Depot Master-Max Professional grade tool that shoots red-dots on walls. Question: Karen did you or anyone else physically touch or hold that tape or laser tool ? She says yes and I even wrote down some measurements on a large piece of graph paper. I scream I think you may have contributed significant appraisal assistance because now I am depending on your non-licensed measurements and photos to derive adjustments. she screams back lighten up it's no big deal the appraiser came in at contract price and even he was not as paranoid as you and he even asked for a copy of our measurements because he said it may save home 30 minutes or more if they looks right.

Question to Karen the top ten billion dollar producer in my market .When the home was appraised did the real appraiser come up with the same measurements as your husbands ? Yes or No - Yes like I told you he used our measurements and he was spot on and since he came in at contract price it really didn't matter anyway. Great thanks Karen I really appreciate your husbands great inspection- photos and measurements maybe he should consider becoming a professional Hybird inspection Associate with Bulls Eye and Speedy Appraisal Management Company. He can pick up an-extra $50.00 bucks a week on the side and that buys a lot of beer. Response: Thanks Angry-Cat those other creeps never try to help us Realtors and when we ask them questions or tell them we only need $500,000 they get all uppity and start talking about something called USPAP and Appraiser Independence. What a crock no wonder everyone hates most of you guys.

Wow glad that's over now all I have to figure out is what's the difference between data and information ? and since that no good Mc-Fugal USPAP instructor gave me a hard copy handbook that kind of screw's me up because my USPAP compliant expert on the forum says data has to be generated from a computer ?

I give up and now I know why my father told me to get a career in the Navy and ditch appraising and USPAP issues.