ABOLISH and OUTLAW bank owned/affiliated and/or contracted management companies.

[xm4yb7]

I thought the date was 1/03/2008 for the signing start of the petition. You may be surprised at the amount of appraisers that will sign.Since some of the signatures have been there since at least 12/13/07 and there are new signatures since my previous post, I would assume that the website is still accepting signatures.

There are maybe five or six people here against this petition. I know for a fact that there are many people that do not post their opinion on here out of fear. That may be true, but they could still sign the petition without the fear of the wrath of this forum.

What on this earth would make any appraiser not want to see crooked AMC's go down? Oh, let me guess...the ones that want to see as many appraisers as possible get out of the business? I don't believe that any people who do not agree with this petition are for crooked AMCs, just advocates of common sense. I do not work for AMCs, so the idea that I disagree with Craig in order to limit my competition has no merit.

I quit appraising last month. I have no real interest in saving a bunch of people that are not interested in saving themselves. The only problem is, I still follow this crap and I guess I would treat this like a passerby that happens upon a traffic accident. I would want to help. I believe that many people here want to help, even those who disagree with the petition. However, I don't feel that the current petition is going to do much good, since many appraisers disagree with it.

If you have any positive insight, now is the time. I do not see a "whiney tone" in this petition, I see someone trying to reach out and help someone. It's a hell of a lot more than I've seen from the majority of appraisers. People have offered their insight, but it seems that that the message is not being received. If all someone wants is an unconditional pat on the back, then you probably won't get it on this site, IMO. People tend to call out things that they disagree with.

Let the attacks begin.......

What some people call attacks, others call some much needed truth. Several people have offered their advice only to be brushed off and insulted. Judging by the emails I have received since my last post, I would guess that I'm not alone in my previous statements. It might not be a great idea to try to unionize appraisers then divide them with a confrontational attitude.

 

[kerrylanger]

What some people call attacks, others call some much needed truth. Several people have offered their advice only to be brushed off and insulted. Judging by the emails I have received since my last post, I would guess that I'm not alone in my previous statements. It might not be a great idea to try to unionize appraisers then divide them with a confrontational attitude.

Cheese And Rice! Is it truth or attacks? There has been plenty of good advise that has been heeded. This petition has been re-written several times (with the help of several people on this forum).

I think the appraisers that oppose this petition happen to be in the minority. It seems there are many behind the scenes that approve.

This is so frustrating. Why not say what you disagree with and get it out of your system? There is a small chance this could work. There are other problems that need to be addressed and if this works, appraisers could start attacking those issues as well.

 

[xm4yb7]

Cheese And Rice! Is it truth or attacks? There has been plenty of good advise that has been heeded. This petition has been re-written several times (with the help of several people on this forum).

I think the appraisers that oppose this petition happen to be in the minority. It seems there are many behind the scenes that approve.

This is so frustrating. Why not say what you disagree with and get it out of your system? There is a small chance this could work. There are other problems that need to be addressed and if this works, appraisers could start attacking those issues as well.

I'm pretty sure I stated what I disagreed with on the 15th of December. Now granted that was the first edition of this petition, but not much has changed since then.

 

[Marcia Langley]

To: U.S. Congress
We beseech the U.S. congress to propose a bill mandating the abolishment of bank owned/ affiliated and/or contracted appraisal management companies for the following reasons:

The stated purpose of this petition is to beseech congress to make a new law that will abolish AMCs. Then it identifies the bullet items as reasons why that law is desirable.

• Asking Congress to outlaw an entire business segment is not advisable. Congress would need overwhelming evidence that the mere existence of AMCs was a violation of the public trust. That would be hard to prove, I’d say impossible. This is a deal breaker. The stated purpose of the petition is deeply flawed. It may be that some of their activities could be shown to be in violation of current law. If that were the case, then the appeal should be made to the Attorney General, not Congress. It may be that some of their activities are not illegal but should be. Those items should be on a separate appeal to Congress, probably one appeal per document. You need to separate items that are violation of existing law from items that you wish to become new laws. Appeal to the AG for the former and to Congress for the latter.

• Appraiser independence (per FIRREA law chapter 564-5-6) is compromised as bank owned management companies have an interest in directing the outcome of the mortgage transaction.
• Management companies who control the appraisal ordering process, negate appraiser independence by coercing appraisers to follow a predetermined outcome, one favorable to the funding of the loan at any cost, and without regard to the welfare of the consumer. Management companies go so far as to remove appraisers who do not meet specific financial goals from their panel of acceptable appraisers.

2. You are claiming a violation of existing law here. If this violation can be proven for AMCs it can also be proven for mortgage brokers and most direct bank clients who allow commissioned LOs to select the appraiser from their pre-approved panel. Why single out AMCs? This appeal should be made to the AG.

• Bank owned/affiliated and/or contracted management companies mark up the cost of an appraisal to cover their overhead, but fail to properly disclose that to the consumer, rather simply stating on the Closing documents that a fee higher than the one paid to the appraiser was charged for the appraisal. As a result, the spirit and letter of the Truth in Lending mandates are being reported inaccurately to the consumer. Profiting from an appraisal fee constitutes a clear conflict of interest for the bank. Mandate that the appraiser collect the entire fee, in advance, directly from the consumer, and not a portion thereof.

3. Here you are asking them to both enforce an existing law and mandate a new one. The mandate is ill conceived. It appears to be mandating that banks run their business like mortgage brokers do. I’d not like that. Banks pay much more consistently than mortgage brokers do. This mandate is really bad. You need to eliminate it. Stick to the USPAP concept of contingency violations and how they affect the public trust. This item is also a big problem with mortgage brokers. Why single out AMCs?

• Management companies routinely demand predetermined values, and routinely refuse to pay appraisers for work if this contingency is not met. They often set forth a scope of work that so limits the appraiser’s ability to properly collect and analyze relevant data that credible results are impossible to attain. Among these requirements are 24 hour deadlines to complete assignments, and a directive to stop work and consult the management company if it becomes clear that any of these contingencies can not be met.

4. This item is also a big problem with mortgage brokers. Why single out AMCs?

• Many bank owned management companies are now filing bankruptcy in an attempt to hide behind a corporate veil. Consequently, appraisers are not paid on jobs performed. Accordingly, said management companies are retaining the appraisal fees and in no way independent of the transaction.

5. Congress will likely not be very interested in who gets paid after a bankruptcy. This is extremely small potatoes to them and can not be clearly shown to be a violation of public trust. This item also is a big problem with mortgage brokers. Why single out AMCs?

• Bank owned/affiliated and/or contracted management companies are not acting in the capacity of fiduciaries to a transaction, as they are so regulated to be, but are interested parties of the first part.

6. This is an interesting conundrum. From AG Cuomo’s point of view in his law suit AMCs are “appraisal companies” and from the fee appraisers’ point of view AMCs are “agents of the bank”. This subject could be the topic of an entire document by itself. If it were ever codified it would cause a whole rash of various parties to change their point of view.

• In addition, management companies appear to be price fixing appraiser’s fees. This alleged collusion by lenders/bankers/appraisal management companies is contrary to anti-trust laws.

7. The crime of price fixing has a long history of case law and should be easy to prosecute. Take it to the AG. This item needs a good lawyer to make the appeal. I’m quite sure an appeal to congress would result in them telling you the same thing.

• Appraisers who are not on key lenders (management companies) approved lists cannot receive work from clients in the mortgage community (mortgage brokers/realtors), which puts appraisers out of business.
• Damage to PRINCIPALS --The consumer -- (buyers/sellers) oftentimes occurs when substantial money paid to management companies for appraisal fees are lost, if/when; the bank (who controls the management co.) decides to not fund the loan. The principal then wants the appraisal report (which the management company routinely refuses to give to the principal) - hence, the ensuing obstacle created via the next BANK owned/controlled mgmt co. (who subsequently refuses to take the report from the appraiser who is not on their approved list), creates havoc and chaos in endeavoring to fund the principal’s transaction.
• The keeping and monitoring of “approved” appraiser lists has turned into a list of “unapproved” appraisers based on nothing more in some cases than the ratio of how often the appraiser “returns the required value”, or one who refuses to accept such limiting conditions as to render an appraisal unreliable. Once an appraiser is placed on one of these arbitrary lists, there is no remedy offered to the appraiser and the appraiser often finds he is blocked from doing business with any or all companies based on such a list. With the existence of so many lists of “unacceptable” appraisers, it is impossible for a buyer to “shop” for a competitive mortgage, as he must continually hire different appraisers based on each company’s “list”. This practice clearly is a restraint of trade in the marketplace

8. All three of these bullets are about one single item. That is whether the client has a right to select the appraiser and how they may go about doing it. That is what “approved lists” and “do not use lists” are all about. What is good for one client is good for another. If Banks and AMCs should not have this right then neither should mortgage brokers. Mortgage brokers abuse this as much or more than any other client. This is a really big and important issue and should be an appeal all its own and be general enough to include all clients. Appraiser selection and appraisal ordering are in the wrong hands. Major abuse of the public trust is taking place. For an example of how this appeal should be written see The Appraisers Petition” in this web site.

• The FIRREA law as it presently stands which states: “The Lender or its Agent mustengage the appraiser”, is in complete contridiction to consumer rights laws, and free trade/commerce, wherein the consumer, ie; the PRINCIPAL cannot engage the appraiser, and seek out an appraisal for a fair price as the Lender (or management company) dictates who the borrower-consumer (Principal) must use.
• Accordingly, damage may result in foreclosure to the principal if they are facing a balloon mortgage or a lapse of contract; and once expired, the transaction can fall apart. Either the principal’s deposit or equity can be lost, as trade has been restrained for the principal.

9. See item 8 and also, the consumer is no more a principle to the mortgage transaction than the lender is. Change the wording. The consumer is no less prone to applying pressure on the appraiser than the lender is. You are suggesting we just move the pressure point, not eliminate it. See item 8. At the time of the appraisal assignment both the client and the borrower are on the same page with applying pressure on the appraiser. If the value is too low they both throw the appraiser under the bus. If the deal works, they both praise the appraiser. If the loan later defaults they both throw the appraiser under the bus. See item 8.

• The actual client (mortgage brokerage agent or real estate agent) is typically forced by the lender to order a NEW appraisal, as the management company more often than not steers the client (mortgage broker/or real estate broker (AGENT) to their approved appraiser), thereby restraining trade for the mortgage brokerage agent and their client, the borrower-consumer, unnecessarily creating time constraints and extra fees contrary to the FIRREA anti-discrimination appraiser law Chapter 564.5-6, which management companies openly, defiantly, and routinely violate.

10. Again, I can’t tell you how disgusted I am by this passage. Eliminate it. Real estate agents are NEVER clients in a mortgage transaction appraisal. They are an interfering source of sometimes intense pressure on the appraiser. They are a vitally interested party to the transaction and have enormous power over the loan originators including banks and mortgage brokers. It completely destroys any credibility your document may have. It is totally against USPAP and no self respecting appraiser would ever sign it. It creates an image of an appraiser that has no clue what being independent and unbiased means. In trying to exempt mortgage brokers from your general complaints you are making yourself appear as if you are struggling to preserve a nice comfy skippy position within the industry. And you are appealing to congress to help you. See item 8.

• Appraisers have seen the pitfalls of the lenders owning the companies selecting the appraisers first hand. Discrimination against honesty and unbiased opinions has led to the reward of fraud, deceit, and unreliable results at the expense of the general public. Without honest, unbiased appraisers who are free to communicate reliable, well researched and well documented reports, who will protect the consumer?

11. See item 8. Why single out AMCs?

As a group, the undersigned implore you to make such affiliations between Lenders and Appraisal management companies prohibited. Help us return the appraisal ordering process to what it was intended to be when such regulations as FIRREA, USPAP and Truth in Lending were established. There is no way a company owned/affiliated/contracted/managed by the lender can act without bias towards that lender. Regulation would only serve to legitimize this orchestrated effort to defraud the consumer. We owe it to the people involved in these transactions, especially in the light of our current mortgage crisis, to give them every measure of protection and disclosure possible to avoid any further damage to our professions and the economy as a whole. Please, outlaw this imbedded, insidious conflict of interest as soon as possible.

Craig, if you were to produce a document that was not so fatally flawed I would be interested in taking a look at it. You keep begging for rewrites that would make it better and we keep telling you that it is so fundamentally flawed that a rewrite will not help. You need to accept that we feel that way and give it up. I really do wish you the best and appreciate that you are exerting a lot of time and passion on this project.

Yes, I wish the AMC model did not exist and yes, my business has suffered greatly because of it. But I think this document is worthless for its intended purpose.

I think a person with time and passion would better spend those resources on a document with a clear USPAP perspective. See item 8.

Many will sign it simply because it feeds into their desire to see AMCs gone without any consideration to how effective it might be or whether it is really good for the public trust. And many will not sign it for reasons I have stated. Let the chips fall where they may.

 

[CraigButterfield]

Sh-t or get off the pot

I'm pretty sure I stated what I disagreed with on the 15th of December. Now granted that was the first edition of this petition, but not much has changed since then.

One after another, the same handfull of cryers reveal themselves.

This is of course exepting the 100 or more people I personally know who will sign it as is, after it is re-publlished, and those whom are still signing my 3rd grade rendition.

Certain persons say THEIR advice has not been heeded, but not ONE anti-jerk has taken 5 minutes to TYPE what they contend needs to be changed, excepting Mr. Roscoe, who is not a jerk, but who wrote a brilliant re-write of my 3rd grade effort.

To date; O action from not so much as one of the complainers retorts, other than contention has been offered forth.

Forget copying and pasting the present version, for those who do not like it. Too difficult, and far too much work effort for the bashers who keep on offering empty esoteric advise.

Then do it this way, any of you bashers, if you can, if you dare; - Start with a blank template - (an empty sheet of white paper, if you will) or open your MS Word and TYPE what you feel it should say - and if you do not think a petition is in order, then stare at the empty screen on your MS Word, when you come to the realization that you actually have NOTHING to say.

Craig Butterfield - State Certified General Appraiser - doing something about one of the big problems in this industry, rather than whining about the problem, as the whiners contend the petition does.

 

[Marcia Langley]

My contention is that the document does more harm than good to appraisers, the profession, and most importantly to the public trust.

It puts appraisers in a very bad light. Write something that makes appraisers look like heros.

 

[CraigButterfield]

My contention is that the document does more harm than good to appraisers, the profession, and most importantly to the public trust.

It puts appraisers in a very bad light. Write something that makes appraisers look like heros.

No - YOU write it - I already have.

 

[The Warrior Monk]

excepting Mr. Roscoe,

Another thing that Mr. Roscoe has done is to act in a professional and noncondescending manner. Many people on this forum are activists and very anti-AMC, and you're out there calling then whiners and bashers.

Realize that what you experience on this forum is absolutely nothing compared to what you experience if you had to answer to Congress...but you don't have to worry about that, because the way the petition is written it's not going to get Congressional attention. If you're serious about this, I'd recommend hiring an attorney that has specialty in that area. Guaranteed their draft won't look anything like yours.

 

[Fred]

Who's more endangered: Appraisers or unions?

Craig Butterfield - State Certified General Appraiser - doing something about one of the big problems in this industry, rather than whining about the problem, as the whiners contend the petition does.

Please don't do anything on my behalf.

This reminds me so much of the AGA modus operandi from 10 years ago. They would produce low-quality communication – and I am not just talking about “typos.” And they would hit every dissenting person the same rhetorical barrages you see here. If you don’t see it their way right off, you are deficient in character.

I suppose if we were all truck drivers, you could make us sign something by burning some of our trucks as an example to the others, or by physically attacking us while we worked. Without those options, you are going to have to be intellectually persuasive to survive.

It seems an impossible task to convince Congress of something that is untrue – that it is inherently evil for banks outsource the grunt work of selecting field appraisers, reviewing their work, and having the work guaranteed.

 

[Kevin Mc]

Ok Craig, I'll help.

for starters eliminate the following

• Appraisers who are not on key lenders (management companies) approved lists cannot receive work from clients in the mortgage community (mortgage brokers/realtors), which puts appraisers out of business.
• Damage to PRINCIPALS (buyers/sellers) occurs when substantial money paid to management companies for appraisal fees are lost, if/when; the bank (who controls the management co.) decides to not fund the loan. The principal then wants the appraisal report (which the management company routinely refuses to give to the principal) - hence, the ensuing obstacle created via the next BANK owned/controlled mgmt co. (who subsequently refuses to take the report from the appraiser who is not on their approved list), creates havoc and chaos in endeavoring to fund the principal’s transaction.
• Accordingly, damage results in foreclosure to the principal if they are facing a balloon mortgage or a lapse of contract; and once expired, the transaction can fall apart. Either the principal’s deposit or equity will be lost, as trade has been restrained for the principal.
• The actual client (mortgage broker or Real Estate agent) is forced by the lender to order a NEW appraisal, as the management company steers the client (mortgage broker/or Real estate broker to their approved appraiser) - unnecessarily creating time constraints and extra fees contrary to the FIRREA anti-discrimination appraiser law Chapter 564.5-6, which management companies openly, defiantly, and routinely violate.
• Summary: Results of this illegal restraint of trade by lenders/management companies are:
1. Appraiser’s lose the relationship between the mortgage brokerage/real estate agent client and their fee, and accordingly their livelihood.
2. The mortgage broker/Real Estate agent in many cases will lose their commission, along with their client.
3. The principal will lose the appraisal fee and/or their property.

A- it is a mess
B- your congressman will get a headache reading it(I did)
C-they will view this entire section as the rambings of a malcontent