AMC asking for UAD 3.6 fees, what's everyone thinking?

[djd09]

appraisers can you stand it...tell me how you can..will you be a lousy scab or will you be a man

 

[Amy Perkins]

IDK, if you estimate the 3.6 adds 20% more time, add 20% more to a fee?
to stay competitive raise fees-10-15% at minimum?
I believe this is a rare opportunity for appraisers to raise fees. If we keep fees the same it might be difficult to raise them later.

No, its 30 pages compared to 4 wanna go broke, because I already am from them not paying on time.

 

[George Hatch]

appraisers can you stand it...tell me how you can..will you be a lousy scab or will you be a man

Scab, huh? That reads like you think any appraiser who participates at TAF is betraying the SFR appraisers via collaborating with the enemy.

 

[DWiley]

No, its 30 pages compared to 4 wanna go broke, because I already am from them not paying on time.

Let's be honest here, its not really 4 I often take a 3.6 report and compare it to a 2.6 report done by the same appraiser. I typically find the 3.6 report is a page or two shorter.

 

[alebrewer]

I don't think there's any question that there will be upward pressure on fees (and turn times). The combination of additional work (both inspection and write-up) and industry attrition will most assuredly put upward pressure on fees. Based on the feedback I've reviewed, we are expecting about a 20% fee increase and 20-30% turn-time increase.

 

[J Grant]

Let's be honest here, its not really 4 I often take a 3.6 report and compare it to a 2.6 report done by the same appraiser. I typically find the 3.6 report is a page or two shorter.

UAD contains a far larger number of data fields. It is not a matter of simply counting pages, especially since 2.6 contains addendum pages. Clever..

Each data field can mean more details gathered at the inspection, more data to research, more info to chase down.

 

[DWiley]

UAD contains a far larger number of data fields. It is not a matter of simply counting pages, especially since 2.6 contains addendum pages. Clever..

Each data field can mean more details gathered at the inspection, more data to research, more info to chase down.

Yes, there are some new fields, but there is very little in 3.6 that the appraiser should not have been collecting already. Just look at ADUs, for example. Today it is a simple check box. In 3.6 there must be data on the size, room count, etc. But, wasn't an appraiser collecting that already? And surely appraisers should have already been noting things like 10' ceilings, no?

 

[George Hatch]

UAD contains a far larger number of data fields. It is not a matter of simply counting pages, especially since 2.6 contains addendum pages. Clever..

Each data field can mean more details gathered at the inspection, more data to research, more info to chase down.

..for the subject property. The problem identification phase of the assignment involves more detail.

 

[J Grant]

Yes, there are some new fields, but there is very little in 3.6 that the appraiser should not have been collecting already. Just look at ADUs, for example. Today it is a simple check box. In 3.6 there must be data on the size, room count, etc. But, wasn't an appraiser collecting that already? And surely appraisers should have already been noting things like 10' ceilings, no?

We could more easily incorporate that information than we can now, which requires rigid ways to put it, a photo exhibit of it, etc.

My impression is that your responses are a defense against letting anyone believe that appraisers deserve a higher fee. Our present fees are far too low; therefore, any fee increase, if we manage to get it, will barely keep us even with inflation, the cost of living, and the cost of doing business.

 

[alebrewer]

And surely appraisers should have already been noting things like 10' ceilings, no?

Tell me - when you were 'actively' appraising, did you really perform analysis to extract adjustments for 10' ceilings vs 8' ceilings? And before you say 'yes', be prepared to share how you extracted that data for the comparables...