ASA fired off quite the letter

[George Hatch]

So then what's your point?

It's not just about the money. I want to appraise until I retire. It's fine if fees go down as long as I have 40 hours of work every week. I've already taken fee reductions in my life. I could be living in Omaha still and be getting ~$500 per order. But I moved to Chicago and I make way less. It's not all about the money.

Again, I have made references to "self-interests". I apologize for not drawing the picture in crayon.

Wait a minute - scratch that. I'm not apologizing for it. You're smart enough that you should have understood it the way I intended it.

And yes, you and everyone else here has good reason to be worried about the staying power of doing what we do. Me included. A large percentage of appraisers aren't going to survive the onslaught of the tech, which that includes a large percentage of the CGs, even if their timeline might run a few years longer. There is no safe space in this business except maybe government employment.

 

[JeffSH]

Again, I have made references to "self-interests". I apologize for not drawing the picture in crayon.

Wait a minute - scratch that. I'm not apologizing for it. You're smart enough that you should have understood it the way I intended it.

You said it was all about the money and made a big stink about it. Now you're saying it's not all about the money because of "self-interests"?????? I just don't understand what overall point you are trying to make.

 

[George Hatch]

The money is a subset of your self-interests. Which you already illustrated with your references to your preferred lifestyle.

Some of you keep assuming that the only legitimate form of appraisal practice is working as a fee appraiser. That assumption is subject to challenge.

10 years from now the typical appraiser may be working in a cubicle farm, conforming to the office dress code and HR policies of respecting everyone's pronouns and not making eye contact with any of the women. Clock in at 8:00, standup meeting at 8:30, one hour for lunch and (2) 10-minute breaks. 'Cause those are the terms of the collective bargaining unit settled for during your contract negotiations.

Human nature is a proven commodity. You'll go broke trying to fight it.

 

[ucbruin]

Started appraising in 1987....
And since that time....
It's always been about the money....
But I'm shallow....

 

[Mark K]

Interesting letter but in the grand scheme of things, it will have no effect. All of his points have been addressed multiple times in various committees and commissions but ultimately, someone with better access and deeper pockets has paid good money to buy the people that make the final decisions. I suspect that Corelogic is in line to sell F/F all of the 'accurate and credible' data necessary for their waiver decisions.

None of this should be a surprise to any appraiser that pays attention to the world around them. For the most part, they have at their fingertips all of the data necessary to produce a reasonably credible appraisal report, thanks to the internet. Did they think that they were the only ones scouring this online data? Plus, appraisers have willingly provided CL and others mountains of data via the UAD reports.

Its like the publishers of those 'old' phone books trying to keep phone numbers off of the internet and force everyone to continue to use the 10 lb books. Appraisers are the harness makers of the past. Sure, they still sell some harnesses today but its a bit of a specialized market.

As to the cries of 'protecting the public good and the taxpayers'....appraisals have never been very useful in that regard. All of the reasonable and credible appraisal reports in the world did virtually nothing to mitigate the last real estate crash. No reason to think they would prevent the next one.

Vetting the borrowers and requiring a sensible down payment would go a long ways in preventing a real estate crash but since the real estate market has become little more than a gov't subsidized and guaranteed welfare program, the last thing the Fed wants is to have anyone (appraisers) in the way of perpetuating this grand scheme.

YMMV.

 

[J Grant]

I sometimes wonder if you even read your comments before posting them.

In one breath you gaslight the observation that the primary concern most appraisers have is based on their own self-interest (because it obviously is about the money) and then by the time you make your way through your other arguments you wrap it up by fretting about the self-interests of appraisers.

I can guarantee you that if the fees for these were $600 that neither you nor 99% of all other fee appraisers would bother signing such a petition. You might continue to fret online a bit about the effects of the RE markets on the general economy but you'd take those assignments if they paid more than a conventional 1004 fee. So would I.

Now please refrain from going into your normal reimagination tack and dishonestly distorting my comment as conveying some criticism of your concerns about the money. I'm not critical of appraisers wanting to act in their own self-interests or of them being worried about their futures or of them hating the fees or the manner in which those fees are set or any of that. Nor am I critical of the ethics of organizing and engaging in collective bargaining. It won't work because it won't work, but I don't think there's anything wrong with wanting what you want.

But what I am saying that none of the people who are claiming that these objections are NOT about the money or the self-interests of fee appraisers are being foolish if they think anyone actually believes them.

Where do you have the entitlement to make such assumptions such as if the fees were $600 we would not be signing such a petition? Who are you, to elect yourself the voice of appraisers and predict what anyone would do and why?
Plus, it is a trick question, and only made to discredit appraisers, since part of the perk for the profit AMC interests was to lower fees, making such an argument absurd. Better yet, why don't you argue the flip side -to your buddies - IF THE LENDER OR AMC's HAD TO PAY $600 TO THE APPRAISERS, WOULD THEY EVEN USE THESE PRODUCTS?


You have vociferously voiced this view that it is just about the fees, and yet never disclose your alignment or why you have such a keen motivation for posting it, repeatedly, any time the topic comes up.

Appraisers cant; help the fact that this issue of product changes intertwines with fees/self-interest. So what are we supposed to do, never talk about it ? The elephant in the room is the fact that is all about the self-interest profits to the stakeholders and entities who advance these products. I do not see you addressing The stakeholders wrt their own interests in an agenda to push certain products.

Now please refrain from going into your normal reimagination tack and dishonestly distorting my comment as conveying some criticism of your concerns about the money. I'm

But you ARE Critical about my/our concerns about money!! How can you not see that? That is the essence of what your posts convey,, which would make you the dishonest one. You've made hundreds of posts that discredit appraisers for their self-interest/concern about fees, (you just did that with your $600 fee/petition scenario, ) then claim that is not what you are doing? Amazing.

PS, these products do not affect my personal income /business but if and when they do I will deal with it then. Only 10-20% at most of my work is through an AMC and the one I actually get orders from is a lender owned with better fees and the rest are non AMC clients. But this business is unpredictable and no client lasts forever. I also do not like see the profession circling the drain just to further enrich internet lenders and AMC's to make a buck - let them make it another way, not by bleeding appraisers out.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

If the waivers fail, then I am all for the big shots at FHFA and FNMA having their paychecks seized and pay for the shortfalls....

 

[J Grant]

Interesting letter but in the grand scheme of things, it will have no effect. All of his points have been addressed multiple times in various committees and commissions but ultimately, someone with better access and deeper pockets has paid good money to buy the people that make the final decisions. I suspect that Corelogic is in line to sell F/F all of the 'accurate and credible' data necessary for their waiver decisions.

None of this should be a surprise to any appraiser that pays attention to the world around them. For the most part, they have at their fingertips all of the data necessary to produce a reasonably credible appraisal report, thanks to the internet. Did they think that they were the only ones scouring this online data? Plus, appraisers have willingly provided CL and others mountains of data via the UAD reports.

Its like the publishers of those 'old' phone books trying to keep phone numbers off of the internet and force everyone to continue to use the 10 lb books. Appraisers are the harness makers of the past. Sure, they still sell some harnesses today but its a bit of a specialized market.

As to the cries of 'protecting the public good and the taxpayers'....appraisals have never been very useful in that regard. All of the reasonable and credible appraisal reports in the world did virtually nothing to mitigate the last real estate crash. No reason to think they would prevent the next one.

Vetting the borrowers and requiring a sensible down payment would go a long ways in preventing a real estate crash but since the real estate market has become little more than a gov't subsidized and guaranteed welfare program, the last thing the Fed wants is to have anyone (appraisers) in the way of perpetuating this grand scheme.

YMMV.

I agree with your post except for this point:
All of the reasonable and credible appraisal reports in the world did virtually nothing to mitigate the last real estate crash. No reason to think they would prevent the next one.

The problem was the LACK of reasonable and credible appraisal reports pre-crash, because the mortgage brokers got to pick number hitters. What we had, was a bunch of number hit /inflated crappy appraisals, picked by mortgage brokers and a lesser number of credible appraisals..

And we appraisers, at least a number of us, wrote a petition sent to regulators about that very problem some years prior to the housing bubble at that time, there were letters written about it, etc, AND WE WERE IGNORED, had they listened to us and had round robbin ordering or some other solution to protect appraiser independence, there should have been a majority of reasonable and credible appraisals performed and it could have better mitigated the effects of the crash. We asked for a simple cheap hotline to report lender pressure abuse and they could not even do that. I agree with you the power players do not want the appraiser to have their intended role because it might put a speed bump in the profit chain. Thus, waivers and marginalize the appraiser's role ..

A valuation/computer product can replace an appraisal, but nothing can replace the human role of an appraiser that as supposed to offer the one and only disinterested party into the process, but that role is only effective if conditions and regulations protect and allow for true independence. That idea must threaten the agenda of those in charge since they have done so much to diminish the possibility.

 

[George Hatch]

Where do you have the entitlement to make such assumptions such as if the fees were $600 we would not be signing such a petition? Who are you, to elect yourself the voice of appraisers and predict what anyone would do and why?
Plus, it is a trick question, and only made to discredit appraisers, since part of the perk for the profit AMC interests was to lower fees, making such an argument absurd. Better yet, why don't you argue the flip side -to your buddies - IF THE LENDER OR AMC's HAD TO PAY $600 TO THE APPRAISERS, WOULD THEY EVEN USE THESE PRODUCTS?


You have vociferously voiced this view that it is just about the fees, and yet never disclose your alignment or why you have such a keen motivation for posting it, repeatedly, any time the topic comes up.

Appraisers cant; help the fact that this issue of product changes intertwines with fees/self-interest. So what are we supposed to do, never talk about it ? The elephant in the room is the fact that is all about the self-interest profits to the stakeholders and entities who advance these products. I do not see you addressing The stakeholders wrt their own interests in an agenda to push certain products.



But you ARE Critical about my/our concerns about money!! How can you not see that? That is the essence of what your posts convey,, which would make you the dishonest one. You've made hundreds of posts that discredit appraisers for their self-interest/concern about fees, (you just did that with your $600 fee/petition scenario, ) then claim that is not what you are doing? Amazing.

PS, these products do not affect my personal income /business but if and when they do I will deal with it then. Only 10-20% at most of my work is through an AMC and the one I actually get orders from is a lender owned with better fees and the rest are non AMC clients. But this business is unpredictable and no client lasts forever. I also do not like see the profession circling the drain just to further enrich internet lenders and AMC's to make a buck - let them make it another way, not by bleeding appraisers out.

I have repeatedly told you "my alignment" is to the profession as a whole. To the legitimate role of what we do in support of the legitimate interests of our users. Not to the suits, not to the corporations, not to the lenders or the GSEs and not even to the subset of the appraisal profession that are working as fee appraisers. I sell nothing to anyone except appraisal work. Even when I was teaching courses to appraisers that was at a monetary loss when compared to spending that time/effort in my day job. I might be wrong and I might be incompetent but I'm not a liar.

I've told you this repeatedly. You (among others) just choose to disbelieve me because you don't like the message. You would like me better if I was nice and told you what you want to hear.

And no, I have NEVER been critical of appraisers wanting what they want. I'm just critical of some of the virtue signaling and mendacity some appraisers use in lieu of simply acknowledging the obvious in their motivations. I don't think the dishonesty can succeed if/when the truth is failing. Now I might be wrong about that but I'm in no way shilling for the suits when I tell you they're not as stupid as some of you apparently seem to think they are.

 

[djd09]

what...USPAP isn't going to save us

anyways

CU is just a risk review tool...ask DW