OR reasonable....
There it is, finally showing it's face.
Now that this thread is a sticky, we should remember to pay thanks to the organizations that support appraiser professionalism for it's proper purpose.
The best friends of appraisers are those who understand that in the priority tier, first comes consumer protection, second comes proper appraiser engagement to enable said consumer protection to be effective. Appraisers exist for the purpose of consumer protection. Because the appraisal is a mandatory inclusion, there are essential rules to guide the implementation of consumer protection and appraisals through a broad audience.
Rotational standards drove the current appraiser & lender mutually originated C&R pricing tiers in scenarios where lenders did not profit by working with this appraiser or that. C&R without consideration to the rotational standard, as well as without consideration to separated billing in order to separate commission based practices from order assignment will not be effective. C&R was not the problem or the solution when isolated on it's own. The pooling of appraiser and AMC fees is the problem, and the problems associated with that brought about the coining of the term C&R in a way which is potentially misleading itself. Lenders should have paid for the service of appraisal management separately. It's only obvious how commission based order assignment is a problem to anyone with their eyes open in the past decade. One commission based assignment method was swapped for another.
As long as the appraisal and appraiser fees are not clearly separated, there will continue to be financial motivation to depress fees.
What exactly is wrong with appraisal management companies billing per order, separate from the appraisers fee? Consumers do not gain the benefit of reduced appraisal charges, because the savings of reduced cost of services are never passed back to the borrower. They cannot choose between high quality service, or reduced cost service. Rather, they always pay a premium. The management company is supposed to work closely with appraisers. They are challenged to work with them ethically and correctly because of the inherent conflicts present with an AMC's commission based methods and the appraisers mandate to remain unbiased. How can an appraiser remain objective and unbiased when they are knowingly discounting in order to attain more work for the purpose of benefiting the clients financial state? Were appraisal management companies (AMC's) to bill in a way where they billed a fixed amount per order, and passed on the costs of the appraiser to the lender, they would be in a much more similar position as appraisers than they are in now. Just like the appraisers, their worth would lie in their productivity and attention to industry standards. In order for them to be positioned as effective stewards of unbiased order assignment, they should not be in a position to profit by engaging in preferential order assignment like they do now.
Thanks to Working RE. I find a lot of value in getting that mail. With so much going digital, the Working RE mag is one of the only things available for regular reading during the evening. That's why it's still so widely read, because it arrives paper printed in the mailbox. Thanks Working RE!
but AMC's have distroyed my business of 8 years. 