FANNIE bonds with AMCs, over your dead low paid body.

[Sandra Koutsopoulos]

OK
Just give me one example where the concern over how fees/costs are split manifests itself in the way so many think it will manifest in appraisal land.

I wish somebody would make the disclosure mandatory so the whole argument would go away. I have never found anyone who is not an appraiser who cares what appraisers make.

Hmmm.... Actually, it seems when ppl DO have a choice, the marketplace changes.
That's why there are fewer auto dealerships with salespeople, and more on-line options and places where the car comes out of a giant cigarette machine building.

The question is: Value for Service. How much VALUE does a car salesperson add to the car for the CONSUMER when they are purchasing a vehicle? The value of the salesperson is actually for the car dealers' benefit who want to move more cars. Consumers can opt to purchase their vehicle online or from a variety of other dealers and choose which price works best for them.

The question is: Value for Service. How much added value does the AMC provide for the CONSUMER to the cost of the product (the appraisal). Again, the value is likely for the benefit of the lender so they don't have to bother with ordering appraisals.
If consumers clearly have choices, they can shop lenders. Perhaps a change in mind would be appropriate, where lenders compete on affordability of the loan based on fees, costs, services, etc.

 

[Alsie35]

Do you consider an AMC to be an appraiser?

How about an AMC as a de facto "in-house GSE" appraiser? (You know, like the gang of 6 or 7, Class et al.) I can smell the stench from all the way down here ...

 

[chad hampton]

None of those are an example for the AMC/appraiser market we are working in. I'm not an employee of an AMC and I never will be.

Can't afford to, saw accurate post an ad for 60k a year to churn out ****ty desktops all day every day. Maybe you should apply? They'll probably burn out in 6 months so it will only cost accurate 30k. 60k/yr , that's 66% of what my 25 year old nieces and nephews make fresh out of college with normal business, etc degrees.

 

[George Hatch]

Hmmm.... Actually, it seems when ppl DO have a choice, the marketplace changes.
That's why there are fewer auto dealerships with salespeople, and more on-line options and places where the car comes out of a giant cigarette machine building.

The question is: Value for Service. How much VALUE does a car salesperson add to the car for the CONSUMER when they are purchasing a vehicle? The value of the salesperson is actually for the car dealers' benefit who want to move more cars. Consumers can opt to purchase their vehicle online or from a variety of other dealers and choose which price works best for them.

The question is: Value for Service. How much added value does the AMC provide for the CONSUMER to the cost of the product (the appraisal). Again, the value is likely for the benefit of the lender so they don't have to bother with ordering appraisals.
If consumers clearly have choices, they can shop lenders. Perhaps a change in mind would be appropriate, where lenders compete on affordability of the loan based on fees, costs, services, etc.

The consumer for what AMCs sell is the lender, not the borrower. The borrowers are consumers of what the lenders sell.

Kinda like the argument some people have been making about what benefit the AMCs provide for the appraisers. Whatever that benefit is/isn't is irrelevant when considering the point that the AMCs don't work for the appraisers; they work for the lender. That makes the lender's interests the priority.,

 

[J Grant]

So, applying that logic to the borrower position, they'd only care what the appraiser was paid if they believe the appraisal to be garbage...

As you often do, you select a snippet from a post and misapply it to create an argument...I simply don't have time for it !

 

[J Grant]

The point is that regulated RE transactions have certain rules and regs regarding third parties, steering, fee disclosures, etc.

None of which is the same as consumers choosing a product or service, and then an argument is made about what the workers or professionals get paid, who are employees.

As a consumer, if I choose Cut Rate cheap tax service, I made that choice. I can choose mid range tax prep, or the most expensive. I choose and I have to deal with the result, whether good, crappy, or mediocre. I personally tend to choose mid-range professionals, and goods.

With an appraisal, the borrower does not get to choose. They trust the lender to choose well for them. Lender with a big fancy bank name and reputation and a mission statement- who pawns off the appraisal to an AMC, which will hold a flea market type bid auction to find the cheapo fee or bid. Which might be the least qualified at times. This is not disclosed to the borrower up front, and the borrower has no choice in the matter. Whereas the borrower can choose a title company, home inspection company, etc- with rules and regs about lenders or RE agents steering towards using certain companies.

 

[George Hatch]

The point is that regulated RE transactions have certain rules and regs regarding third parties, steering, fee disclosures, etc.

Exactly so. Their conduct is heavily regulated and they are under supervision and subject to regular audits for their compliance. That is not to say they are adequately monitored or that there is adequate enforcement for their conduct, but it isn't even possible to get to enforcement without first having regs in place that are written well enough to be enforced.

A 65mph speed limit might be poorly enforced, but enforcement would be impossible without first having the legal limitation of that 65mph in effect. In writing and explicitly enough to hold off the lawyers from arguing "it depends on what 'is' is".

That's what is missing from Chad's allegations - regs which are specifically written to prohibit the lenders from from using the [appraisals + PDR] combination. Violations of which prohibitions would be the example of "not enforced" to which Chad keeps referring.

 

[Zoe]

Enough babble. Separate the fees on truth in lending disclosures and watch what GSEs do.

The change in market structure would impact GSEs as much as anybody. When the borrower or lender changes on change in market structure, it would change GSE market structure.

GSE has to buy truth in lending disclosures. Not appraisal data. They get appraisal data for free.

 

[J Grant]

The consumer for what AMCs sell is the lender, not the borrower. The borrowers are consumers of what the lenders sell.

Kinda like the argument some people have been making about what benefit the AMCs provide for the appraisers. Whatever that benefit is/isn't is irrelevant when considering the point that the AMCs don't work for the appraisers; they work for the lender. That makes the lender's interests the priority.,

Correct the AMC benefits the lender. Thus, the lender should pay the AMC a cost for the service, not have the AMC compensated off the appraiser's fee split.

 

[chad hampton]

Im not aware of any law that says you have to buy a car from a dealership. That's one big difference there.