ASA fired off quite the letter

[George Hatch]

I never thought the suits were stupid. Most of them are very intelligent. The issue is not their intelligence, it is (applies to some or all, idk ) willingness to game the system, while talking about acceptable risk and transparency when it is all about their own profit- which one could say is just business, exept that this involves taxpayer backing and the housing market which affects so many working Americans.

There is no way to tell how the use of WAIVERs, which lend on sale price ( as long as it is within their inhouse AVM range), has affected prices in the market. All they look at is some sliver of risk to their own interest in a self-tailored study.

I have never argued that these users are virtuous or that their concerns extend beyond their own bottom line or that these decisions they're making are wise or well-considered or safe/sound. So every fallacy you are building that's based on that red herring is an automatic fail.

I don't think that offering the observation that they THINK these are good decisions doesn't amount to me undermining appraisers.

 

[djd09]

I’m just thrilled our organization has jumped into the discussion. These organizations have influence and need to be involved.

Has the Appraisal Institute said anything yet?

...i have been warning since the birth of the borg...

 

[George Hatch]

I can see that. I suppose that’s also very true for many in other independent professions. Financial advisors, CPAs, Estate Attorneys, etc. included.

The one dominant trait I’ve always found to be noticeable with the typical appraiser, is the “half empty” view of everything related to our profession. Every time there has been a change impacting us, the sky is always falling according to most appraisers I know.

I’m neither “half full” nor “half empty” and I’ve always considered myself a realist instead. You seem to be similar based on your posts. But it’s something I’ve noticed, even with many of our peers out here in the blog world.

We get lied to all the time. That's just the nature of the business. "Trust, but verify" resonates with most of us. TBH, if we're doing our jobs appropriately then we WILL be pissing someone off on a regular basis.

IMO appraisers have nothing to lose by making their complaints and providing their input. But I also think it helpful to maintain a realistic expectation for how these other parties are most likely to act, and then not take it personally when they proceed to meet those expectations.

 

[Zoe]

Might as well send it regular mail too for signatures.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Somebody is going to do it

At least they would be accountable to the legislature not some 3rd party for profit to themselves organization like TAF.

I suspect few would pay dues to a union.

Nope. And fees appraisers pay compared to NAR dues (MLS not included) are rather expensive. As are licenses.

Also need it on court docket. Step 2.

Court docket makes it public.

irrational

 

[George Hatch]

At least they would be accountable to the legislature not some 3rd party for profit to themselves organization like TAF.​

Nobody is accountable to TAF except for their own employees, the USPAP instructors and any of the other QE/CE providers who are buying/using their materials. Especially not the states. TAF provides *instruction* to them about the material but they don't regulate them in any fashion.

 

[glenn walker]

Sorry guys the ASA guy fired off a letter that never asked for petitions and in fact the letter said nothing new except how he feels about the changes. Thats fine but ASA abandoned the Residential Appraisers years ago and its membership is in a rapid decline. This Subject is not new and its sorta late and frankly nobody is going to pay any attention to it. Now I am just a messenger but Petitions simply do not work in appraisal issues. The Powers to be already made the decisions that will and are being implemented. This letter was 10 years too late and just a last gasp of air for ASA.

 

[djd09]

there is a reason why fannie, TAF, and REVAA are located next to each other...15th st is a party

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Nobody is accountable to TAF

The law forces appraisers to buy USPAP - which is NOT regulated by the states who regulate us...duh

 

[J Grant]

I have never argued that these users are virtuous or that their concerns extend beyond their own bottom line or that these decisions they're making are wise or well-considered or safe/sound. So every fallacy you are building that's based on that red herring is an automatic fail.

I don't think that offering the observation that they THINK these are good decisions doesn't amount to me undermining appraisers.

t's, not your observation that they THINK they are good decisions that is problematic

Its your frequent and vociferous posting, that the appraiser's objections to these changes is all about fees, and that because we (in your view) don't acknowledge that, it is all hypocrisy, virtue signaling etc. The fact that us folks signed the prior value pressure petition (which I believe you signed as well,) had no intersection with fees and yet we still signed it. So why keep undermining appraisers on this one, when it is not our fault the issue this time intersects with fees ? None of us are denying self-interest plays some role, but not the entire role. And the self-interest of appraisers means surviving to have a role in the process, ch I believe that does serve the public - or could if independence was protected (which it is not ) And that observation is outside of any personal gain I might ever hope to have ( which is almost nil at this point )

BTW, I personally don't believe that they ( the stakeholders ) THINK they are good decisions. I believe they think they are willing to take a gamble they can get by with minimal downside and lots of profit if they make others believe they think they are good decisions.

The question is good for whom? Lenders who make a sliver of more profit from faster closings? In that sense, yes, the products are "good"...are they good for homeowners and the public? They are more convenient and consumer-friendly, but because of the large amounts of money at stake, idk if they are "good" for the public, markets, or homeowners.

A dentist visit is not fun, fast, or consumer friendly, but it is "good" for people. As an analogy.
Giving someone candy is fun, tastes good, and is consumer-friendly in pretty packages, but it is harmful as a steady diet. As an analogy.