GSE Waiver & Data Collection Data

[J Grant]

What should it be called ? Is there a Special Word or Term you like ?

Data collection is fine, a bloodless corporate word. No matter what words, term, or label they gave it, the people involved would still incorrectly use the title inspector and describe it as an inspection, which misleads parties into assuming it is a licensed inspection of some kind or associated with the appraiser.

I mean, what idiocy would it imply to the public trust that the appraiser is excluded ( for no good reason) from seeing the property and an unlicensed person sent instead to "collect data"?
I bet borrowers are charged the same or similar as when the appraiser goes out.

 

[glenn walker]

Focus on the Issues not the labels. The label doesn't change anything and is just another rabbit hole with no end or solution. You ever wonder why appraisers never win any battles?

 

[George Hatch]

Data collection is fine, a bloodless corporate word. No matter what words, term, or label they gave it, the people involved would still incorrectly use the title inspector and describe it as an inspection, which misleads parties into assuming it is a licensed inspection of some kind or associated with the appraiser.

Which parties are misled? Because the borrowers are not a party to the appraiser's agreement with their client. Nor are the appraisers a party to the relationship between the borrower and the lender.

We might be able to fairly say the lenders are ripping off their borrowers with the bundled fee, or that a PDC who shows up and introduces themself as an appraiser performing an appraisal in violating state law. We might be able to say the lenders have no right nor reasonable necessity to take the additional risks, and so on.

But even if/when all that is 100% true, the liability and exposure for these other parties are doing doesn't fall to the appraiser when they're working to specs.

As for the PDCs, maybe the lenders can force them to write 500x on the blackboard their script for these contacts:

"Good Afternoon. I am Carl the Can Collector and I'm here to look at the property and take pics for the lender. This won't take but a few minutes". ​

 

[J Grant]

I am going to show you 2 pictures which speak to the actions of the individual and the expectations of the users. Both are taken off of GSE appraisal forms.

View attachment 100216
---------------------------

View attachment 100217

I understand that George, and it has nothing to do with the discussion, as are the tiresome reminders to us that USPAP does not require an inspection.

The appraiser signs they did not perform an inspection, but the public thinks SOMEBODY inspected, since the lenders or PDC people, will use the word inspection and inspector. The owner or other party will assume the person walking around their property, taking notes and photos, was sent by the appraiser or is licensed and the like.

I bet they would not be happy if it was very clearly explained to them that the appraiser will not be coming and a RE agent or other party will come and rote gather data. Tht is not clearly expeanied to them, and they should have a choice if they want the appraiser to come out and inspect .

 

[Surf Cat]

I completely agree. Less is always less.

But by the same measure, the users sometimes think less is sufficient to purpose. It was always like that - albeit to the lesser degree - since before any of us got into this business.

Unless in your hybrid assignment, you didn't come in at the top of the gross and adjusted ranges.... now it's not sufficient anymore.

 

[J Grant]

Focus on the Issues not the labels. The label doesn't change anything and is just another rabbit hole with no end or solution. You ever wonder why appraisers never win any battles?

No, the labels are used as a legal work around to screw appraisers and mislead the public, sorry for being so blunt.
In legal terms and in professions, words have meanings as well as penalties for misuse.

 

[glenn walker]

"Price versus Value:"

 

[glenn walker]

No, the labels are used as a legal work around to screw appraisers and mislead the public, sorry for being so blunt.
In legal terms and in professions, words have meanings as well as penalties for misuse.

Screwing the appraisers ( YES )
Misleading the Public ( NO )

The public doesn't care how it's done and yes they know the process is now two steps, and the Realtors are educating their customers about how appraisers now are doing less physical and spending more time spent on valuation issues.

Frankly the only one's who seem to be out of the loop are the appraisers. Is that Intentionally being done ? I think maybe it is because the Big Boy's know appraisers are against it.

 

[George Hatch]

I understand that George, and it has nothing to do with the discussion, as are the tiresome reminders to us that USPAP does not require an inspection.

The appraiser signs they did not perform an inspection, but the public thinks SOMEBODY inspected, since the lenders or PDC people, will use the word inspection and inspector. The owner or other party will assume the person walking around their property, taking notes and photos, was sent by the appraiser or is licensed and the like.

I bet they would not be happy if it was very clearly explained to them that the appraiser will not be coming and a RE agent or other party will come and rote gather data. Tht is not clearly expeanied to them, and they should have a choice if they want the appraiser to come out and inspect .

Since when have appraisers ever been oh-so-concerned about what the borrowers did and didn't understand about appraisals? Appraisers are *required to disclose in the report* what they did/didn't do WRT an inspection. Anyone who doesn't read the report might come to the wrong conclusion but if so that's entirely on them.

If the lender has the right to engage and use these assignments then it is what it is. If they get sued for the bundled fee then they get what they get; no appraiser is going to sympathize with them. And that includes me.

Meanwhile, the appraiser's discretion occurs at the time of engagement: accept or decline.

 

[J Grant]

Since when have appraisers ever been oh-so-concerned about what the borrowers did and didn't understand about appraisals? Appraisers are *required to disclose in the report* what they did/didn't do WRT an inspection. Anyone who doesn't read the report might come to the wrong conclusion but if so that's entirely on them.

If the lender has the right to engage and use these assignments then it is what it is. If they get sued for the bundled fee then they get what they get; no appraiser is going to sympathize with them. And that includes me.

Meanwhile, the appraiser's discretion occurs at the time of engagement: accept or decline.

Why are you goading people and denigrating appraisers and repeating the GSE talking points? wrt it is what it is - , lousy things are what they are - terrible. We've seen plenty of it in lending, GSE decisions, and in valuation. We know about accepting and declining, at the time of engagement, why keep stating the obvious?
The field is being destroyed and decimated one piece at a time and this one more piece. That is why concerned appraisers are posting. It might not help to post it, but it is at least teh truth.

Appraisers did not have to be "concerned" about what borrowers understood wrt the inspection because we were doing the inspection.