Hybrid Appraisals

[J Grant]

The reason you're trying to tone police me for making you feel bad is because you cannot shut down or override the facts or the reasoning under observation.

I already said that your current problem is the declining demand for appraiser hours coupled with the advance of the tech-enabled marketplace. And whatever movements they're making away from the universal use of 1004s for every assignment regardless of circumstance.

This ain't 2004. It doesn't cost XYZ Services even $.10 to add 1000 more licensees to one of their blast emails. And they only need 1 of those licensees to take the assignment at that fee. In lieu of any indications that one individual has an unacceptable track record they don't much care exactly which licensee goes for the bait. Not for most of those assignments.

You guys are constantly complaining about that, so none of this is news to you.

I am not trying to tone police you .

I am trying to correct the misleading posts you have continue making such as that lenders would shop for the lowest fee if no AMC is involved, that it is the technology's fault, and not undersaing how the bundled fee works to the lender advantage by giving them free of cost service on the backs of appraisers. Your last several posts admitted some facts, finally, but then here you are arguing, I am not sure what, exactly!

Take it up with others - I have spend way too much time on it in this thread. said.

 

[Surf Cat]

What a disaster.


When was the last time that happened, so long as the value was where they needed it to be? Remember - if you want to push this back to the brokers, that's who's gonna be reviewing the appraisals - the brokers' underwriters.


Also incorrect. Brokers valued appraisers who could lie and still be believable. They didn't value credibility.

So...... in a nutshell, it's all a sham.

Appraisers are too weak to produce a credible report, especially if ordered by a mortgage broker (who are producing documentation for waivers...valuations) or a borrower, or a realtor because they are biased.....unlike an AMC. BUT....it's fine if the borrower hires the appraiser to find out MV, what their home should sell for, or an estate appraisal, or an evaluation for the Assessor for tax purposes. For a loan though.... the appraiser turns into a biased buffoon and can't be trusted.

Why should the lenders, whom are ultimately responsible for the quality of the appraisal, care who orders the appraisal? So long as the value was where they need it to be as you say....why should it matter? Since the lenders are ultimately responsible for the quality of the appraisal, yes, they would be responsible for reviewing the appraisals. That's part of the deal.....why they get the big bucks.

The Appraiser should be a fully independent contractor who gets full fee and shoulders the full responsibility of the credibility of the report.....like any other contractor, auto mechanic, plumber, electrician, etc. That's what we are licensed and insured to do.

Brokers valued appraisers who could lie and still be believable. They didn't value credibility.

And AMC's do?!

What a disaster is right....

 

[TC]

Until the mentor thought the trainee was proficient enough to inspect, etc on their own.

How many inspections for you?

 

[George Hatch]

I am not trying to tone police you .

I am trying to correct the misleading posts you have continue making such as that lenders would shop for the lowest fee if no AMC is involved, that it is the technology's fault, and not undersaing how the bundled fee works to the lender advantage by giving them free of cost service on the backs of appraisers. Your last several posts admitted some facts, finally, but then here you are arguing, I am not sure what, exactly!

Take it up with others - I have spend way too much time on it in this thread. said.

Another day, another reading comprehension fail.

• I never once blamed tech for the entirety of the AMC problem, what I said is the tech is an enabler. not the same thing as a motivator.
• I only blamed short sighted appraisers for the initial oversupply that provided the AMCs with their "if you won't do it..." alternatives. You need to stop complaining about the blame for that being laid at its source.
• I never once "don't understand" what the AMCs do to fees or why the lenders enjoy the free-to-them management. IIRC I was the one who introduced you to that idea in the first place all those years ago. You certainly didn't come up with any of that on your own.

Like I said before, you seem to believe that the AMC-users will stop using AMCs if the bundled fee is outlawed. I disagree.
You have said before that you think the AMCs will have no reason to shop by fee if their end is fixed. I disagree.
You think the HVCC "gave" to the AMCs whereas I think of it as it "deprived" the lenders of their preferred alternative, and that is why they migrated to the their 2nd choice; that next best-for-them alternative.
I think the AMC-users will do anything to avoid taking on the effort/expense of direct engagement.

The reason we disagree has nothing to do with you expressing ideas that I don't understand. You literally don't have what it takes to out abstract anyone on this forum. Even Fernando understands your commentary.

I simply disagree with you on the issue, and the main reason I disagree with you is because - when it comes to the well-being of fee appraisers - I think even more poorly of the AMC-users than you do. You seem to be optimistic about what they would do if forced into that choice whereas I am extremely pessimistic about that response. I say that based on the pattern of conduct they have established over the years. I don't believe they're going to change, even under duress. They're going to use whatever dodge they can find to control their out-of-pocket regardless of the effect on the fee appraisers. IMO

 

[glenn walker]

How many inspections for you?

He followed her around because he had doubts abour her doing it right.

 

[J Grant]

Another day, another reading comprehension fail. subtard.exe

• I never once blamed tech for the entirety of the AMC problem
• I only blamed short sighted appraisers for the initial oversupply that provided the AMCs with their "if you won't do it..." alternatives.
• I never once "don't understand" what the AMCs do to fees or why the lenders enjoy the free-to-them management. IIRC I was the one who introduced you to that idea in the first place. You certainly didn't come up with any of that on your own.

Like I said before, you seem to believe that the AMC-users will stop using AMCs if the bundled fee is outlawed. I disagree.
You have said before that you think the AMCs will have no reason to shop by fee if their end is fixed. I disagree.
You think the HVCC "gave" to the AMCs whereas I think it "deprived" the lenders of their preferred alternative, and that is what elevated the AMC play as their next best -for-them alternative.
I think the AMC-users will do anything to avoid taking on the effort/expense of direct engagement.

The reason we disagree has nothing to do with you expressing ideas that I don't understand. You literally don't have what it takes to confuse anyone on this forum. I just disagree with you, and the main reason I disagree with you is because - when it comes to the well-being of fee appraisers - I think even more poorly of the AMC-users than you do. You seem to be optimistic about what they would do if forced into that choice whereas I am extremely pessimistic about that response. Based on the pattern of conduct they have established over the years. I don't believe they're going to change, even under duress. They're going to use whatever dodge they can find to control their out-of-pocket regardless of the effect on the fee appraisers. IMO

Okay, we have common ground.

I do not have any fantasy about AMC's or the lenders who use them. However, they would have to follow the law if the law did not allow HUD bundled fees to compensate the AMC for the lender's benefit of having the service free of cost to them. However, though anything is possible, I doubt that regulatory change is likely.
I am realistic about the bleak outlook for res mortgage work, which is why I repeatedly warn newbies not to enter the appraisal field on the res license side.

 

[alebrewer]

ppraisers are too weak to produce a credible report, especially if ordered by a mortgage broker (who are producing documentation for waivers...

Well, there is the evidence to consider...

 

[glenn walker]

This bundled fees issue is ridiculous but she just can't get how the system operates. But no matter what the AMC is not leaving until the appraisers leave and then the ones owned by the large title companies will use the platforms to manage and sell other services.

 

[alebrewer]

I expect LOs/Brokers to act like loan originators. To advocate for the deal. That's a very necessary function in the mortgage lending business so we do need them. Best of luck to them.

But by the same measure, they have no business touching any aspect of the lender's due diligence functions except to not lie on the applications they submit to the lenders.

So there are different channels in the wholesale space - delegated and non-delegated. In the NDC world, the broker underwrites their own loans. Of course I don't blame anyone for advocating for the deal. There is a difference, however, in advocating for the deal and being able to pressure appraisers WRT future business or appraisal payments.

 

[George Hatch]

I read "underwrites their own deals" to imply making their own decisions with their own money.