Data Cancer Due to Waivers

[Non Sequitur]

Hot off the press!

 

[glenn walker]

It appears Mr Miller didn't look into that dataset either. He's deferring to PCs reputation in lieu of doing any verification of his own or forming an level of informed opinion of that analysis . No different than if Miller did a review and jumped direct to PCs status as his sole reason for his opinion and in lieu of looking any deeper.

"I think this valuation is reasonable because PC did it". ​

Now if Mr Miller had done any of his own analysis and come to his own opinion - as is commonly done by reviewers who are expressing an opinion of the quality of the work - then we could refine this disagreement to appraiser-v-appraiser . Fair play. But that isn't what we have here. If the appeal to authority is to be taken more seriously than the appeal to reason and evidence then Mr Miller could just as easily have swallowed whole the Brookings Institute analysis and cited their reputation and credibility as his sole reason for his agreement.

And nobody here is doing that.

Neither one carries much weight in the Real Estate Community. And they are both desperately trying to make a living selling Hats..T Shirts..Coffee Mugs etc.

 

[George Hatch]

Hot off the press!

Good interview. Good insider perspective.

All forms of diligence act as friction on the deal. That's precisely the point. Saying so isnt some gotcha. The valuation of the collateral, the title report, the home inspection, the borrowers employment and credit history - all of these forms of diligence are fully designed and intended to slow down the execution of the deal enough for the lender to make a more informed decision. Our function is far more closely aligned with the underwriting function than with the origination function. It always has been. Our role should always have been cast in alliance with the underwriters, not in opposition or friction with them as is the case when we're working for the originator. .

WRT due diligence, less is always still less. The less diligence the GSEs exercise the greater the risk. Everyone has always understood that, too. Nobody ever said otherwise. Where the disagreement has been is in finding that point of balance between expediency and risk. Exactly how much risk does the lender think is acceptable.

The GSE pushback he was talking about was because the GSEs want to act more like a lender and prioritize their competitive position and market share (like a lender) while the govt needs them to support the nations economic agenda (like a govt agency). These political agendas change with each opposing presidential administration.

 

[Joyce Potts]

Ding Dong the CFPB is dead.

 

[Zoe]

Ding Dong the CFPB is dead.

Is FDIC next?

 

[Joyce Potts]

It depends on the results of the DOGE colonoscopy.

 

[Zoe]

Let's just fire all of FDIC and FSLIC without congress.

Sounds like a good plan.

 

[Joyce Potts]

How's it worked so far? Lets get the results of an audit. After all, Congress has failed miserably cutting waste. They just pass out the money the fund the political back door deals.

 

[Zoe]

It depends on the results of the DOGE colonoscopy.

Don't play me girl. I don't like being patronized.

It is scary times.

 

[Joyce Potts]

Who patronized whom first? It's great times. Accountability that is long overdue.