GSE Waiver & Data Collection Data

[George Hatch]

You should stop defending the immoral and unethical behavior that occurs in this profession. Hold yourself to a higher standard. In the end, you won’t want to be associated with that crew.

I don't defend unethical conduct. But the words are the words and you are using them inaccurately for the purpose of defending something they never said. If you were taking the test you would flunk it because you're incompetent with the material.

You made an unsupported allegation (again) and I am calling you on it (again) and you are dodging the challenge by talking about the people instead of the content. Again.

So either show us an example of what you're alleging about the content. Or don't. Put up or shut up.

 

[djd09]

the corrupt leading the greedy...what could go wrong

 

[djd09]

there aint no party...like a 15th st party

 

[George Hatch]

Guilt by proximity. Again. Meanwhile, appraisers work for and get paid by lenders every day. Some of those same lenders being the source of most of the appraisers' problems that they always complain about.

Self-awareness being completely lacking.

 

[J Grant]

The GSE rationalization for using a PDC collection to avoid the taint of bias is specious.

First of all, there have only been a handful of cases and the lenders settled not out of wrongdoing but to avoid bad publicity. The claimants knew that and these suits were a scam. Shame on Fannie and Freddie for not reviewing the appraisals in these cases, though, seeing how they operate, they would not have been honest about the results anyway. They want to sell the narrative that PDC collection is about avoiding bias when it is not a problem. The GSEs worked on PDC/hybrids for originating loans before the biased cases even happened.

If there is a bias lawsuit, it is about the $ value opinion. If a property owner does not like the value, they will sue whether a data collector or an appraisers showed up.

 

[J Grant]

This could work both ways, a god send for the older appraisers who don't want to fully retire or quit but don't want to fight California freeway insanity 2 to 4 hours everyday. For some become a PDC inspector, others, may elect to do the appraisal portions without leaving the office.

If a few hybrids provide a few $ spending money for a few semi-retired or disabled it is a positive. But the erosion in fees hurts everyone else. If hybrids go mainstream, the erosion in fees over a wider segment of work will drive more fee appraisers out of business.

The fees on the PDC side are $75-$125. Minus $15 gas costs and it is $60- $110. Divide it by time spent driving, on site, then having to get the report right and upload it, and the $ per hour is roughly the same as a gig for UBER or Instacart. The PDC collections are high stress and uneven volume, so unless one is on retainer for volume, the income will stink. The appraiser is a lazy competitor with non-licensed people for the orders, so fees will remain low.

The appraiser desk portion will also see reduced fees. Same problem with uneven volume. Not a win on any level fr appraisers, a win for AMC 's who order most of them, and the AMC can profit from either end of the assignment with a fee, appraiser max out staff appraiser productivity.

 

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

The GSE rationalization for using a PDC collection to avoid the taint of bias is specious.

First of all, there have only been a handful of cases and the lenders settled not out of wrongdoing but to avoid bad publicity. The claimants knew that and these suits were a scam. Shame on Fannie and Freddie for not reviewing the appraisals in these cases, though, seeing how they operate, they would not have been honest about the results anyway. They want to sell the narrative that PDC collection is about avoiding bias when it is not a problem. The GSEs worked on PDC/hybrids for originating loans before the biased cases even happened.

If there is a bias lawsuit, it is about the $ value opinion. If a property owner does not like the value, they will sue whether a data collector or an appraisers showed up.

I totally agree with J Grant on this topic!

Most appraisers do not want anything to do with hybrids. That is telling in itself. Only the helpless AMC sheep appraisers and TC are willing to do them as not to ire their clients and stay in business.

 

[J Grant]

I totally agree with J Grant on this topic!

Most appraisers do not want anything to do with hybrids. That is telling in itself. Only the helpless AMC sheep appraisers and TC are willing to do them as not to ire their clients and stay in business.

Right. Appraisers believe it is better to do our own inspections for our own appraisals—even if fees were the same, that would not change.

Traffic is a PITA, and so on, but doing your own inspection anchors the appraisal, and one can feel more confident about a tough value call. Appraisers might find themselves doing a hybrid if the lenders and GSEs expand their use, and how that will impact anyone's decision about the business will be indivusal.

 

[TC]

I totally agree with J Grant on this topic!

Most appraisers do not want anything to do with hybrids. That is telling in itself. Only the helpless AMC sheep appraisers and TC are willing to do them as not to ire their clients and stay in business.

Bite me, Duckie Boy!

 

[George Hatch]

I completely agree that the bias allegation looks like it was just added as an afterthought, and that these attempts are more about leveraging the dwindling supply of available appraiser hours.

TO ME it looks like they're willing to pay the higher rate for the hours which actually require an appraiser's analyses, opinions and conclusions; but 1/4 that rate for the hours that don't require any of an appraiser's training, knowledge, experience or appraisal competency.

The number of residential appraisers is in decline so they might be anticipating that the "available appraiser productivity" could put them in the servient position in the supply/demand dynamic. They don't want to pay $1000 fees for Fernando's SFR reports ever again.