First Hybrid request.

[chad hampton]

I’d like to know how a substandard field appraisal inspection from an unlicensed appraiser even made it to your desk. Did no one at the AMC review it for quality?

Maybe they will start reviewing **** if we pay them a larger cut?

 

[djd09]

a misleading report is an USPAP infraction...emailing a report that is misleading is wire fraud punishable up to 10 years in prison

 

[alebrewer]

I never assumed 2055s were that credible. The bank just wanted a ballpark idea if they ended up for closing. I do remember turning some down when I saw they were for refinances.

I would say hybrids are on the same level as a 2055. They don’t let us train an employee to go do inspections for us, so I’m not about to accept the results from someone I don’t know or have trained. They should not be used as a 1004 replacement.

Fair assessment. And you're not alone (obviously). OTOH - there are lots of folks who believe the scope of work requirement for a 2055 is no different (WRT personal/physical inspection at least) than the scope of work requirement for a desktop/hybrid. I'd be one of the ones in that camp. I'm comfortable relying on 3rd party data that I believe to be credible - regardless of whether that is zoning information, tax information, Realtor information, or 3rd party inspector information.

 

[Airstream]

I am not reflexively against a hybrid. The problem is I want to know the level of training and expertise of those actually doing the inspection. In this instance the inspection was done by a real estate agent. So in the busiest time of the year this agent is doing inspections for $75. That tells me he is either an inexperienced agent (a problem), or is a crappy agent because any agent that has time to go do an inspection for $75 probably isn’t very productive.

IMHO, I believe that an inspector should be able to fill out the property characteristics on the 1004 and do so credibly. AND they should be held liable for failing to legitimately describe the property. In other words that agent’s (or broker’s) E&O now become fair game. I wonder if he would then do it for $75 or if the broker would even let him!!

I have always said one of the ways to be productive in this business is to partner up with another appraiser. One do inspections, while the other writes up reports. Switch roles from time to time. After the inspection the field appraiser sends up the data to the cloud, and the desk appraiser can download and start working on the report. All that unproductive drive time is eliminated. YET in our appraisal world the inspecting appraiser has to sign the report. Now think about the hypocrisy of this!! Lenders can hire an inexperienced, non-liable, and unlicensed person to do a PDC, and they don’t have to sign the report. And the signing appraiser is liable for the content of the report. But appraisers can’t do their own PDC with a colleague. Does anyone think about this nonsense?

 

[chad hampton]

Fair assessment. And you're not alone (obviously). OTOH - there are lots of folks who believe the scope of work requirement for a 2055 is no different (WRT personal/physical inspection at least) than the scope of work requirement for a desktop/hybrid. I'd be one of the ones in that camp. I'm comfortable relying on 3rd party data that I believe to be credible - regardless of whether that is zoning information, tax information, Realtor information, etc., including 3rd party inspector information.

And that’s fair, I guess I view it a little differently. With a 2055 pre-foreclosure there is no real option of doing an interior inspection. When an interior inspection is possible and required, why would having to roll the dice and rely on third-party even be a consideration? We know that the appraisal inspection is considered significant appraisal assistance by definition, so it should be either the appraiser or someone under their direct supervision.

It doesn’t need to be so complicated. For some reason, the powers that be despise the ideas of trainees doing anything, but they’re completely for unlicensed individuals doing everything. This is why I say there’s a lot of mental gymnastics that are involved in trying to justify these things.

They should just come out and say the truth, we want the AMC’s to make more money and you guys going out to do the inspection cost too much, so we don’t really care about that part so we’ll try to find an agent to go do that for cheap, you could stay in your desk and do that part for cheap and our buddies that run AMC’s could take a bigger cut. I’d have a little bit of respect for them if they just told the truth.

But I still wouldn’t agree.

 

[chad hampton]

I am not reflexively against a hybrid. The problem is I want to know the level of training and expertise of those actually doing the inspection. In this instance the inspection was done by a real estate agent. So in the busiest time of the year this agent is doing inspections for $75. That tells me he is either an inexperienced agent (a problem), or is a crappy agent because any agent that has time to go do an inspection for $75 probably isn’t very productive.

IMHO, I believe that an inspector should be able to fill out the property characteristics on the 1004 and do so credibly. AND they should be held liable for failing to legitimately describe the property. In other words that agent’s (or broker’s) E&O now become fair game. I wonder if he would then do it for $75 or if the broker would even let him!!

I have always said one of the ways to be productive in this business is to partner up with another appraiser. One do inspections, while the other writes up reports. Switch roles from time to time. After the inspection the field appraiser sends up the data to the cloud, and the desk appraiser can download and start working on the report. All that unproductive drive time is eliminated. YET in our appraisal world the inspecting appraiser has to sign the report. Now think about the hypocrisy of this!! Lenders can hire an inexperienced, non-liable, and unlicensed person to do a PDC, and they don’t have to sign the report. And the signing appraiser is liable for the content of the report. But appraisers can’t do their own PDC with a colleague. Does anyone think about this nonsense?

Instead of having to worry about the level of training and experience that this random person is getting, wouldn’t you feel more comfortable if they said you could hire somebody to do field appraisal inspections, even if they’re unlicensed, as long as they’re under your supervision.

When these things were first concocted out of thin air, that’s what us in appraisal groups actually thought they were talking about, breaking the appraisal up in the two parts and whether we would be OK getting a field appraisal report from another appraiser and doing an appraisal off of it. We didn’t love the idea, but figured if they were licensed we’d have to deal with it.

Then they started bringing up real estate agents, and any other sort of day laborer that they could find. It was bizarre.

 

[alebrewer]

It doesn’t need to be so complicated. For some reason, the powers that be despise the ideas of trainees doing anything, but they’re completely for unlicensed individuals doing everything. This is why I say there’s a lot of mental gymnastics that are involved in trying to justify these things.

It seems to me that they don't 'despise' that model, but rather that they have no impetus to protect the appraiser profession - other than protecting the service that appraisers provide them. And when that service is no longer valued, there will be absolutely zero impetus to protect appraisers. Not bad or good - just is. If their opinion is that 3rd party inspectors can (and do) provide similar (or better) quality inspections than appraisers do, and assuming it's based on some level of data analysis (which DW assures us it is), then why would they be interested in restricting the inspections to appraisers (or their trainees) only?

 

[Airstream]

Instead of having to worry about the level of training and experience that this random person is getting, wouldn’t you feel more comfortable if they said you could hire somebody to do field appraisal inspections, even if they’re unlicensed, as long as they’re under your supervision.

When these things were first concocted out of thin air, that’s what us in appraisal groups actually thought they were talking about, breaking the appraisal up in the two parts and whether we would be OK getting a field appraisal report from another appraiser and doing an appraisal off of it. We didn’t love the idea, but figured if they were licensed we’d have to deal with it.

Then they started bringing up real estate agents, and any other sort of day laborer that they could find. It was bizarre.

If I personally trained them over a period of time I would have no problem with an unlicensed person. My son is a prime example. He had been in the building trades and I trained him to be an appraiser. He was very good and knowledgeable about doing inspections.

But these PDC people get ZERO training. Just because someone is a licensed real estate agent means nothing.

 

[J Grant]

I am not reflexively against a hybrid. The problem is I want to know the level of training and expertise of those actually doing the inspection. In this instance the inspection was done by a real estate agent. So in the busiest time of the year this agent is doing inspections for $75. That tells me he is either an inexperienced agent (a problem), or is a crappy agent because any agent that has time to go do an inspection for $75 probably isn’t very productive.

IMHO, I believe that an inspector should be able to fill out the property characteristics on the 1004 and do so credibly. AND they should be held liable for failing to legitimately describe the property. In other words that agent’s (or broker’s) E&O now become fair game. I wonder if he would then do it for $75 or if the broker would even let him!!

I have always said one of the ways to be productive in this business is to partner up with another appraiser. One do inspections, while the other writes up reports. Switch roles from time to time. After the inspection the field appraiser sends up the data to the cloud, and the desk appraiser can download and start working on the report. All that unproductive drive time is eliminated. YET in our appraisal world the inspecting appraiser has to sign the report. Now think about the hypocrisy of this!! Lenders can hire an inexperienced, non-liable, and unlicensed person to do a PDC, and they don’t have to sign the report. And the signing appraiser is liable for the content of the report. But appraisers can’t do their own PDC with a colleague. Does anyone think about this nonsense?

These are the new GSE appraisal and valuation policies that benefit the lenders and AMCs. The rub is that these loans are taxpayer-backed, and the GSEs have a public-trust mission. The pubic is not well informed or well advised - witness the fact that the GSE's silently watched the public be decived for over a decade wrt disclosure an AMC was used witn no fee breakout dislsosrue. It needs to be done upfront, at loan application, not afterward in mouse type on the appraisal. There are court cases now for the borrowers about non-disclosure of AMC fee breakout and amount of AMC fees seen as egregious.

There is no disclosure when a WAIVER was used as part of conventional financing; therefore, the public or other parties cannot track the performance of these loans. Note that cash, VA, FHA, and conventional (which used to use appraisals ) are all disclosed. But no info that a waiver was used shows up on MLS or public records. So how can anyone else track it? They can't.

The entities deceive the public by saying the "risk" is not greater by using an alternate value or none in a WAIVER vs an appraisal. That is because they convince people to tie in appraisal risk with the metrics of buyer default. Appraisal risk is about the collateral of the property, not how the borrower will perofrm ( though an inflated value can lead to consqeuences for a borrower)

The GSE;s accept a borrower or lender estimate of value for the subject ( fannie admits the estimate of value might not represent the value of the proeperyt in a WAIVER/value acceptance), - after their secret, not seen by anyonelse "data analyaics" the GSE accept a vested interest party estimating the subject value and a non appraiser person who takes a quick online course to go to the subject instead of the appraiser - what can one say about that? They continually rationalize it by citing the worst example of the lowest standard allowable.

 

[George Hatch]

Are we being paid for the quality control we’re expected to do on the front end because of the awful policy that is a hybrid appraisal?

So according to this policy, we’re supposed to review the information for free and then let them know if we can proceed?

Don't do anything if you don't want. Just decline the assignment. You're passing up the opportunity to complain but that's okay. Nobody is going to notice or care.

However you handle problems with the other data sources you use will be just as effective with this source.