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

[Tiffany Gibbons]

Or maybe an alcohol induced personal rant

The GSEs are not appraisal entities and the people actually calling the shots on their official commentary are not necessarily the appraisers. The GSEs are not our friends and they have no reason to provide cover for us or for any appraiser misconduct . So if the allegation is that there are political overtones in play then the how and the why for that would be perfectly understandable. Not to mention the point that whatever the data is saying is what it is. Even if someone wants to spin it some other way that spin doesn't change whatever the facts are on the ground.

As an appraiser I want to believe we are being falsely accused. I want to believe in the zero defect performance insofar as personal biases issues are concerned. We already know that we don't have a zero defect performance for other forms of ethical misconduct, we're just hoping that doesn't extend to treating people differently based on their superficials.

But if the data is actually saying there's something significant there then it doesn't serve our long term interests to gaslight or deny those conclusions. Better to address a known problem directly than to outright deny on the fact-free basis its existence.

The talking heads for the GSE"s can manipulate "data" to show whatever they want. They are not acting in an appraisal capacity. There 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?

 

[TerryRohrer]

I have never heard, nor ever seen, where any non-GSE appraiser has suggested that bias cannot occur or suggested anything but that any individual found engaging in such should be summarily removed from our ranks. If one or hundreds of thousands of borrowers of any persuasion are impacted, that is unacceptable. But it is inexcusable to publish a conclusion maligning thousands with the hottest, most divisive, most slanderous charge of our time when they can't identify it, can't quantify it, and couldn't recognize it if they were staring at it. And a few minutes with a spreadsheet and a tidbit of data will not replace the need for actually conducting analyses and, god forbid, looking at a few appraisals with an understanding of the market wherein the subject lies. Solutions are marching into place for a "problem" no one can say with any certainty even exists. There is nothing defensible about that, no matter who the spinner.

 

[Elliott]

Competent and objective analysis of the Freddie Mac hit piece suggested that:

"...it was premature to publish a note based only on “exploratory research” limited to a single race-based correlation, with no attempt to present a rigorous analysis regarding other potential explanations. Merely stating that low appraisals resulted in “substantial appraisal valuations gaps” for minority versus White tracts provides an ominous sounding headline, but sheds little light on whether the gaps support a claim of systemic racism. Even worse, Freddie Mac’s research note was quickly seized by policymakers and the media as evidence of systemic racism.2 Rather than being due to racial discrimination by appraisers, we found Freddie’s claim of an “appraisal gap” is much more likely the result of would-be first-time buyer inexperience, socio-economic status (SES), or government actions (in particular a concentration of FHA lending in certain census tracts) with a disparate impact on protected classes. Our analysis, which goes well beyond Freddie Mac’s “exploratory research”, can explain around 85% for Black tracts and 29% for Latino tracts of the gap through differences in socio-economic status (SES), leverage, and borrower characteristics. With the full set of controls, the Black gap disappears entirely, while the Latino gap falls by almost half."
chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.aei.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Freddie-Mac-note-on-Racial-and-Ethnic-Valuations-Gap-Housing-Center-Critique-Jan-2022-final.pdf?x85095#:~:text=From%20these%20data%2C%20Freddie%20Mac,correlation%20was%20inappropriate%20and%20premature.

The statistical analysis the 'reseaarch' was based on (check the R^2)......

 

[Non Sequitur]

Solutions are marching into place for a "problem" no one can say with any certainty even exists. There is nothing defensible about that, no matter who the spinner.

Yep, but that's nothing new. The Buzzard retired off of calling appraisers criminals.

 

[TerryRohrer]

The Buzzard

A JT reference, I presume?

 

[Non Sequitur]

A JT reference, I presume?

Like Beetlejuice, don't say her name out loud or she'll appear.

 

[George Hatch]

The talking heads for the GSE"s can manipulate "data" to show whatever they want. They are not acting in an appraisal capacity. There 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?

The allegation is that the appraisers hate them for being black and are trying to keep them down. That the appraisers are doing it out of personal animus, even if it costs their client the deal.

As for manipulating data to show a desired outcome I daresay everyone suspects everyone of that one.

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

The allegation is that the appraisers hate them for being black and are trying to keep them down. That the appraisers are doing it out of personal animus, even if it costs their client the deal.

As for manipulating data to show a desired outcome I daresay everyone suspects everyone of that one.

Exactly why I prefer rural areas. Pretty difficult to manipulate that kind of data. Not many "value acceptance" deals either. Who exactly is alleging that first paragraph exactly?

 

[DWiley]

ShareFile

appraisalfoundation.sharefile.com

"Be Sure to Check Out the Concept Paper Assessing the College Degree Requirements in the Criteria

"The AQB has released a concept paper assessing the college degree requirement in the Real Property Appraiser Qualification Criteria along with reference material which informed the initial paper. This is the first step in the AQB's comprehensive study of all aspects of the qualification criteria.
Now, they are seeking public input on the concept paper. Public comments are critical to the development of new editions of the Criteria, and the Appraiser Qualifications Board values all input it receives.

"The Appraiser Qualifications Board is now accepting all public comments until July 27th. To submit a comment, click here, and the AQB will review your feedback.

"Appraiser Qualifications Board Chair Brad Swinney, Vice Chair Jerry Yurek, and Vice President of Appraisal Issues Lisa Desmarais will host a webinar to discuss this Concept Paper on June 6, 2024, at 1:00 PM ET. Register here to attend the webinar.

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.

 

[J Grant]

The GSEs are not appraisal entities and the people actually calling the shots on their official commentary are not necessarily the appraisers. The GSEs are not our friends and they have no reason to provide cover for us or for any appraiser misconduct . So if the allegation is that there are political overtones in play then the how and the why for that would be perfectly understandable. Not to mention the point that whatever the data is saying is what it is. Even if someone wants to spin it some other way that spin doesn't change whatever the facts are on the ground.

As an appraiser I want to believe we are being falsely accused. I want to believe in the zero defect performance insofar as personal biases issues are concerned. We already know that we don't have a zero defect performance for other forms of ethical misconduct, we're just hoping that doesn't extend to treating people differently based on their superficials.

But if the data is actually saying there's something significant there then it doesn't serve our long term interests to gaslight or deny those conclusions. Better to address a known problem directly than to outright deny on the fact-free basis its existence.

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.