Subject: Don't just vent about UAD 3.6

[djd09]

it is like a prisoner setting the requirements because they are the users

 

[George Hatch]

Professions set their standards. What a random user will accept, which apparently in the lending world is the bare minimum garbage anyone with a pulse can produce, isn't the standard that the appraisal profession should set for itself. I think we should be held to a higher standard. One that the professionals in our industry set. Not ones that have been on the special interest payrolls over the years. Too much of an appearance of impropriety we have going on. I don't even really blame them, - they've worn so many hats over their careers, they can't keep anything straight.

For 25 years now the SOWR has literally been saying otherwise when it comes to making such decisions in an assignment. Nobody but you is talking about a random or a specific user. And when it comes to a specific assignment the SOW decision itself doesn't entirely hinge upon only the user.

And before you even get going on it (because I can see that stupid argument coming in advance) , kindly note that these criteria are based on "same or similar assignments", not only one type of assignment. What the lenders using these assignments expect, what the appraisers' actions are when performing these assignments. Not what you think should apply to everyone all the time.

 

[chad hampton]

What I like I best about some of you is that it never even crosses your mind that you might be part of the problem. It's almost admirable.

Nothing honorable about defending a ****ty system.

 

[Zoe]

What I like I best about some of you is that it never even crosses your mind that you might be part of the problem. It's almost admirable.

Nothing honorable about defending a ****ty system.

I question motivations everyday and am pretty good at getting to them. It makes you wonder what the motivations are.

Not sure public trust is the main motivation.

 

[George Hatch]

What I like I best about some of you is that it never even crosses your mind that you might be part of the problem. It's almost admirable.

Nothing honorable about defending a ****ty system.

First off, bad compared to what? Compared to a hypothetical alternative that doesn't exist because it basically can't exist?

I have never had anything to do the establishment of these requirements or of any aspect of the appraisal standards or the economic environment you're complaining about. My role has been limited to understanding the content and conveying the information to my peers. The reason you keep using the term "word salad" is in an attempt to divert from your complete and total inability to mount a persuasive argument using the terms in their defined context. A competency problem.
---------

Let's run a hypothetical and see if you are capable of reasoning your way through this: What if USPAP actually had established requirements for personal inspection and minimums for that inspection for all appraisals., How do you think the users would respond to that external-to-them requirement? Would they just sit back and take what they consider the hit or do you think they would they seek their alternatives elsewhere? Use your words.

In your opinion, do you think *reducing* the flexibility appraisers currently have in their assignment choices and/or SOW decisions amounts to an advantage for appraisers or a disadvantage?

I invite you to consider the applicable parallel in this situation to the lenders' usage of

"if you won't do it we'll just go find someone else who will". ​

 

[George Hatch]

Use your imagination: This ain't 1990 no more; it's 2026. If you were a lender in 2026 and the appraisers were prohibited from performing no-look appraisals at their desk then what alternatives might you consider to use instead of an appraisal? What work-arounds do you think you could identify to do what you wanted to do whether the appraisers cooperated or not?

 

[chad hampton]

Who do you think pushed for hybrids several years ago? And why do you think they did?

You don't seriously believe it was the lenders that thought sending realtors, people they found on craigslist, former felons, and other unlicensed individuals into people's home to perform appraisal services was a good idea, do you? It wasn't the lender's lobbyists showing up at state boards and making calls to TAF to figure out a way to make it permissible. It wasn't the lender's lobbyists who threatened the state board should they attempt to enforce their laws that required the certified appraiser to have direct oversite of anyone providing appraisal assistance. A normal person might conclude that's a prudent law to have in place for obvious reasons.

We've always had desktops, exterior only, and interior appraisals. Appraisers already offered those options. Have any of those groups mentioned above claimed and signed certifications stating they are an unbiased 3rd party? I know realtors certainly aren't. That's an important concept. Probably why years ago the NC RE commission reprimanded an agent who did one.

Why do you think they took the long road of flying lobbyists all over the country and strong-arming state boards and other various regulatory bodies to come up with an entire new group of people to do field appraisal work, instead of asking that trainees be permitted do more of field appraisal work?

I'm sure you know how this game works when you work with these types of people.

 

[djd09]

Who do you think pushed for hybrids several years ago? And why do you think they did?

You don't seriously believe it was the lenders that thought sending realtors, people they found on craigslist, former felons, and other unlicensed individuals into people's home to perform appraisal services was a good idea, do you? It wasn't the lender's lobbyists showing up at state boards and making calls to TAF to figure out a way to make it permissible. It wasn't the lender's lobbyists who threatened the state board should they attempt to enforce their laws that required the certified appraiser to have direct oversite of anyone providing appraisal assistance. A normal person might conclude that's a prudent law to have in place for obvious reasons.

We've always had desktops, exterior only, and interior appraisals. Appraisers already offered those options. Have any of those groups mentioned above claimed and signed certifications stating they are an unbiased 3rd party? I know realtors certainly aren't. That's an important concept. Probably why years ago the NC RE commission reprimanded an agent who did one.

Why do you think they took the long road of flying lobbyists all over the country and strong-arming state boards and other various regulatory bodies to come up with an entire new group of people to do field appraisal work, instead of asking that trainees be permitted do more of field appraisal work?

I'm sure you know how this game works when you work with these types of people.

according to them...15th st can do no wrong

 

[J Grant]

Use your imagination: This ain't 1990 no more; it's 2026. If you were a lender in 2026 and the appraisers were prohibited from performing no-look appraisals at their desk then what alternatives might you consider to use instead of an appraisal? What work-arounds do you think you could identify to do what you wanted to do whether the appraisers cooperated or not?

If appraisers were prohibited from doing no- look appraisals at their desk, one assumes the appraisers would then do "look" (inspect) appraisals. It is an appraisal either way. Why would lenders perfer a "no -look" appraisal? I bet if they were polled, lenders would want the appraiser to see the property, or not care either way- they just want it done.

The AMC';s are the ones that benefit from hybrid appraisals. Desktops are not used for most origination loans.

Lenders are regulated because they sell loans guaranteed by taxpayer money. If it was their own money, they could choose whatever slimy sh**t alternatives they want. The GSE's are allowing lenders a long leash by allowing waivers and hybrids. The lenders are limited in choice by what the GSE's accept

 

[Surf Cat]

The lenders want to control the inspection process and make it a standardized checklist. The powers that be "definitely" want to get away from narrative commentary regarding the subject property. DW complained about it earlier in the thread, the head operation director of True Footage complained about commentary in an interview I read. Commentary and addendums are out.

Given the above, one would think
"appraisers can follow a checklist". But the bottom line is the bottom line...Jr. realtor or Uber drivers are cheaper..... not because they're better qualified.

The old school appraiser is being neutered from being a neutral, independent, non-biased entity in the real estate process to a checkbox chimp. The old school real estate appraiser is sinking into the Tar Pits like a dinosaur. Emerging from the remains is the non-licensed data collector.

"Check the boxes on our form, take the photos where we tell you, and we'll tell you what the condition of the property is. Don't you worry about it".

Loan approved.