Federal Reserve Bank Of Philadelphia - Appraising Home Purchase Appraisals

[hastalavista]

If the research (due diligence) performed is as comprehensive as the below statement appears it is they lose some credibility. Dodd-Frank and HVCC have no working relationship, unless I misunderstood that D-F made HVCC obsolete.


From page 5:

In particular, many lenders have turned to AMCs to help ensure compliance with the HVCC, the

appraiser independence rules in the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act,

and the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines.3

I don't read this as a credibility issue.
They seem to refer to the evolution of the growth in AMC use. I'd say HVCC was the main engine in that launch with D-F being the booster stage.

 

[BRCJR]

Do you really think anyone is going to care about that misstatement regarding the HVCC, which really is not germane to their conclusions? If that is best argument that appraisers come up with regarding this paper, they are deep do-do.

No as a matter of fact I do not think anyone will care. I only pointed that out because it shows there are flaws in their report and we have no way of knowing what else may or may not be flawed.

 

[BRCJR]

I don't read this as a credibility issue.
They seem to refer to the evolution of the growth in AMC use. I'd say HVCC was the main engine in that launch with D-F being the booster stage.

see post 12

 

[Eli]

Why disagree with the paper? If their data, analysis and conclusion are valid, appraisers should use AVMs and charge less.

You have a point there. Because legal issues come into play. Just like LA is bowing their back on legal issues.

 

[timd354]

VA would say look at our track record and laugh. Me too.

You mean the VA track record where defaults were substantially higher than conventional GSE loans at their peak? I don't think that is going to be a winning argument and I don't think that anyone in Washington is really going to care that you and other appraisers are going to laugh at or scoff at the conclusions in the paper.

BTW, my posting of this paper is not an endorsement of its conclusions. I just posted it so appraisers will know what they are up against when it comes to arguing against PIW's and other appraisal alternatives. You can poo-poo it and laugh it off or you can take it seriously and actually come up with some intelligent and well supported arguments regarding its conclusions or, better yet, get the AI and/or NAIFA to study the issue in the hopes that such a study will reach a different conclusion.

 

[Eli]

Take note the Federal Reserve Bank went bankrupt.

 

[Eli]

You mean the VA track record where defaults were substantially higher than conventional GSE loans at their peak? I don't think that is going to be a winning argument and I don't think that anyone in Washington is really going to care that you and other appraisers are going to laugh at or scoff at the conclusions in the paper.

BTW, my posting of this paper is not an endorsement of its conclusions. I just posted it so appraisers will know what they are up against when it comes to arguing against PIW's and other appraisal alternatives. You can poo-poo it and laugh it off or you can take it seriously and actually come up with some intelligent and well supported arguments regarding its conclusions or, beteer yet, get the AI and/or NAIFA to study the issue in the hopes that such a study will reach a different conclusion.

Are you referring to default or losses? Did VA need a bailout?

You are a hoot if there ever was one.

 

[hastalavista]

One of the recommendations is one many of us have been arguing in favor of for a long time:

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

authors conclude that appraisals have an upward bias,

Since appraisals and applications hit the junk pile when they are not high enough, how could they not have an upward bias? They only get to count the appraisals that are at the selling point and above. All others don't make the database.

 

[hastalavista]

One thing for sure; this paper sure adds fuel to Mike K's "bulls eye" argument!