AQB's latest dumbing down by 'Stakeholders' Dropping the College Degree Requirement

[chad hampton]

I think a lot of appraisers are done writing letters. I’ve seen comment periods for all sorts of things in this profession be posted online over the years. The comments are 50 to one one sided, and the powers that be make changes that satisfy the one out of 50.

We’ll see, maybe this time will be different. For the sake of the profession I hope so.

 

[djd09]

Benefits of exercising a value acceptance offer▪ Increasedoperationalefficiencies. Value acceptance can shorten the loan origination process by eliminating the need to obtain and review an appraisal.▪ Day 1 Certainty®.Exercising a value acceptance offer relieves the lenderfrom enforcementof representationsand warranties on the value, condition, and marketability of the property.▪ Reduced loan origination costs. Value acceptance provides a no-cost alternative to an appraisal, whileeliminating the expense of appraisal-related delays in the origination process.▪ Ease-of-use. To exercise a value acceptance offer, lenders simply provideSpecial Feature Code (SFC) 801 attime of loan delivery to Fannie Mae

they are not trying to eliminate the appraiser...

 

[djd09]

I think a lot of appraisers are done writing letters. I’ve seen comment periods for all sorts of things in this profession be posted online over the years. The comments are 50 to one one sided, and the powers that be make changes that satisfy the one out of 50.

We’ll see, maybe this time will be different. For the sake of the profession I hope so.

dont waste your time sending comments...they will just file you as disobedient...and probably send your name to all the unethical stakeholders

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Nor have I ever suggested that the GSE's goal is to eliminate appraisers.

They want the rubber stamp that transfers liability for their actions to others, otherwise they want the appraiser to do their bidding to maximize the profits without regard to the risk to the enterprise or the taxpayer. Again, incentivize the GSEs with the mandatory economic death penalty that strips them of every dime they own if the cost the taxpayers money.

paints a picture of less appraisers chasing a shrinking number of desktops for less money (they don't mention less money but anyone in this space knows what the going fees are).

We absorbed 'less fee' in the 90s due to rapid improvement of technology that allowed us to do our job faster. But being a property inspector for 20% of the fee is a no-go in my book...and that is where we are headed. All liability and no compensation.

here would be no reason for an appraiser to purposely use non comparable sales to get a lower value. What would be in it for the appraiser?

Exactly. What incentive does an appraiser have to short-change someone they do not know? There is none.

For the sake of the profession I hope so.

not gonna happen. We survive by serendipity.

 

[Surf Cat]

Benefits of exercising a value acceptance offer▪ Increasedoperationalefficiencies. Value acceptance can shorten the loan origination process by eliminating the need to obtain and review an appraisal.▪ Day 1 Certainty®.Exercising a value acceptance offer relieves the lenderfrom enforcementof representationsand warranties on the value, condition, and marketability of the property.▪ Reduced loan origination costs. Value acceptance provides a no-cost alternative to an appraisal, whileeliminating the expense of appraisal-related delays in the origination process.▪ Ease-of-use. To exercise a value acceptance offer, lenders simply provideSpecial Feature Code (SFC) 801 attime of loan delivery to Fannie Mae

they are not trying to eliminate the appraiser...

 

[Zoe]

As is often the case here, the various conspiracy theories inserted in the thread have diverted attention away from the actual topic.

It seems pretty clear that some here have very strong views regarding the topic of the AQB's Concept Paper. I would encourage all with views to provide comment, as the AQB has requested.

This is a chance to provide your input and suggestions before any formal action is actually taken. Take advantage of that.

I don't really see the conspiracy theories Sir.

Is Freddie sending a letter to AQB or are they having coffee over a donut down at the coffee shop this morning?

Make Joan pay the bill at the coffee shop.

Maybe an AMC will pick up the tab.

 

[Zoe]

Servicelink is probably writing a long letter.

 

[George Hatch]

I think a lot of appraisers are done writing letters. I’ve seen comment periods for all sorts of things in this profession be posted online over the years. The comments are 50 to one one sided, and the powers that be make changes that satisfy the one out of 50.

We’ll see, maybe this time will be different. For the sake of the profession I hope so.

Soliciting comments to an exposure draft is not intended to function like an election or a beauty contest. Ideally, they're seeking different opinions and reasoning for use in their considerations, hopefully in an effort to avoid the unintended consequences of the decicion making in question. So the "vote" doesn't contribute to that. Especially when the motivations of that vote are wholly irrelevant to the concepts and principles involved.

One example of "unintended consequences" can be attributed to the mistake the ASB made with the wording in the definition of "misleading", which contributes to why they were forced to backtrack and retire that definition in the very next USPAP revision.

 

[George Hatch]

The "data " does not say anything significant All it showed is that in some census tracts, which they claim are more heavily minority, there is an appraisal "gap," of a few percent ot less, between the appraisal value and the purchase price in purchase assignments. This means nothing, and there should have been a corresponding control data study run between lower-income and lower-income, predominantly white areas to see if there is any more of an appraisal "gap" in sale prices between the two.

They even alluded to a few possible reasons for it, other than bias - and the reasons are deferred maintenance, more flip sales, more FHA finsciang infated saale prices to cover for concessions added. Their cherry-picked data study alone did not prove any deliberate bias was in play.

Further more, fannie and Freddie never bothered to question the high profile cali case if the second vastly hither value appraisal was inflated/pooorly supported /ordered vy the bnorrwoer expressly for that purpose with them choosing an appariser who promised a high value , or had an agenda to do so. The public outcry came after that case, and they did not investigate the appraisals; they enabled the outrage based on a case -some appraisers here who know the area. I believe you were among them, researched comps and concluded the high value seemed not not supported.supported.

The GSE does not have to be our friends, but they are not supposed to be our enemies either, and their declaring that bias was a problem when there were no grounds for it is a deceptive act .

If prices are lower in some heavily minority areas, then values will be lower because appraisers use the sales in the area. All the Freddie and Fannie agencies had to do was explain that to the committees, and as far as I know, they did not.

As far as zero defect, USPAP says perfection is not possible, and if one or two instances happen a year, whether in appraisals or an AVM or other valuation, then let the agreed parties sue in the rare instance they might have a legit case. But demonizing an entire profession on no factual basis is inexcusable.

I would not assume that the GSEs didn't look at all the appraisals they have on file for each of these controversial cases.

As for the role of the GSEs, they're a lending entity. If you wouldn't expect BofA to defend the appraisal profession against allegations of widespread misconduct then it becomes unreasonable to expect the GSEs to act any differently. Same with TAF, for that matter; they're not an advocacy group for appraisers, either. If you want member advocacy then go join one of the professional orgs whose primary role IS the well being of their brand and their members.

If the quants at the DC offices of the GSEs - who have no allegiance to the appraisal profession - are coming to certain conclusions about the appraisal gap then that could very easily occur all on its own without any agreement or approvals or endorsements of any of the appraisal staff. If the numbers are the numbers then it would actually become unethical and immoral for the GSE appraisal staff to gaslight or mischaracterize those results.

We tell borrowers all the time that the numbers are the numbers, and that this is just business. That data-driven reasoning doesn't change just because we're now the ones who not getting the outcomes we want in this situation.

 

[djd09]

conspiracy theory...dw is on a roll...the only conspiracy i see is the one where appraisers are conspiring with the banksters and realtors to devalue neighborhoods...