Freddie Mac vs Appraiser Bias

[Dale Floyd]

I admit to confusion. Taking the statement above as truth, then why would an appraiser not want to transfer that liability to another party by having that third party measure?

Unless you have changed your tune, and these third party inspectors are going to be licensed and insured, that "liability" can't be transferred to them. From all the conversations I've had with you and multiples of others, the GSEs are thinking about third party independent inspectors without the burden of licenses, and possibly an appraiser in California might be doing the appraisal in Brentwood, TN based on the inspector's information.

And believe it or not - APPRAISERS sign the APPRAISALS. We can claim no liability all day long, but that may not fly as well for us in court or in front of Mr. Atwood at the commission in Tennessee, regardless of what you might think. We certify that we are using reliable/trustworthy sources for our data. How in the world can we certify a third party inspector's information to be reliable since we know nothing about him/her/them?

And before you point to MLS and tax records, those sources can actually be taken to task for inaccuracies. These third party inspectors will not have any more liability than somebody hired to mow a yard.

 

[Zoe]

You think testing something and looking at the resulting data is wrong? What alternative approach would you suggest?

I think your opinion is speculative at best.

1. Education for appraisers that you perceive negligible.

2. Reprimand after warnings.

3. Drop the AMC. Maybe best option.

4. Use licensed and insured inspectors and appraiser relies on that data, however appraiser still inspects subject.

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

What is with the license shaming. That is the second time you have asked that question. I answered it the first time (in another thread). I can guarantee it wasn't because of the "man" holding me down.

Sorry, didn't mean to trigger anything. FYI, my mentor was a man and he encouraged me to go ahead and get my CR, but he required that of all the appraisers who worked for his company. He encouraged me to earn my designations, my college degree, my CG. He is an instructor, very accomplished, and I much admire him for taking the chance that my "clerical" work as you (and the TN commission) classified prior experience as would actually help me as a trainee to produce more work. We would run appraisals together, divide them up and each type the reports, then switch and go over them and ask each other questions before signing off together. It's easy to get a trainee trained to measure and take photos, but difficult to get them to type reports to my satisfaction (that is my problem and I own it). I remember your story now, your mentor was busted doing something shady and you dealt with the fallout. That sucks and I am so sorry for bringing it up again.

 

[Zoe]

How in the world is an unlicensed professional going to rate condition or quality of construction better than the appraiser unless the appraiser has their full inspection report and insurance information or bond information?

So this inspector rated it c3 and appraiser rated it c4? Are you serious?

 

[glenn walker]

No big deal the appraiser doesnt have to accept the assignment if he/she cant sleep at night. Frankly many who have to do a lot of long distance driving will love these.

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

Unless you have changed your tune, and these third party inspectors are going to be licensed and insured, that "liability" can't be transferred to them. From all the conversations I've had with you and multiples of others, the GSEs are thinking about third party independent inspectors without the burden of licenses, and possibly an appraiser in California might be doing the appraisal in Brentwood, TN based on the inspector's information.

And believe it or not - APPRAISERS sign the APPRAISALS. We can claim no liability all day long, but that may not fly as well for us in court or in front of Mr. Atwood at the commission in Tennessee, regardless of what you might think. We certify that we are using reliable/trustworthy sources for our data. How in the world can we certify a third party inspector's information to be reliable since we know nothing about him/her/them?

And before you point to MLS and tax records, those sources can actually be taken to task for inaccuracies. These third party inspectors will not have any more liability than somebody hired to mow a yard.

Dale, Mr Atwood is the reason I always do overkill data on my acreage adjustments and site value if I include one, lol. I don't think he's too impressed with the third party inspection idea either, so there is that. I agree, appraisers will be held responsible, no matter how it is spun.

 

[George Hatch]

Unless you have changed your tune, and these third party inspectors are going to be licensed and insured, that "liability" can't be transferred to them. From all the conversations I've had with you and multiples of others, the GSEs are thinking about third party independent inspectors without the burden of licenses, and possibly an appraiser in California might be doing the appraisal in Brentwood, TN based on the inspector's information.

And believe it or not - APPRAISERS sign the APPRAISALS. We can claim no liability all day long, but that may not fly as well for us in court or in front of Mr. Atwood at the commission in Tennessee, regardless of what you might think. We certify that we are using reliable/trustworthy sources for our data. How in the world can we certify a third party inspector's information to be reliable since we know nothing about him/her/them?

And before you point to MLS and tax records, those sources can actually be taken to task for inaccuracies. These third party inspectors will not have any more liability than somebody hired to mow a yard.

Inspector's liability is literally not the appraiser's problem. And no, we do not certify to any of the information being reliable, from any source. What we certify to is "to the best of our knowledge and belief". The assertion is that on our end we are operating in good faith.

Equally,
"...may not fly well in court..." can't happen unless the court or the state board forgets how to read the disclosures as what the appraiser did/didn't do in their SOW. If you're afraid of your board's competency then that's an issue between you and your board.

You've never been sued for any errors of fact in your 3rd party data that occurred in a 2005 - when all you did "in addition to a desktop" was to drive by the front of the property. You didn't measure, you didn't walk through, and you don't know. What you did do was proceed with the data at hand per "to the best of my knowledge and belief". How does a desktop SOW suddenly become more of a threat to your liability than a 2055 SOW? For which you've never been hassled?

 

[Dublin ohio]

Sorry, didn't mean to trigger anything.

Projecting again? Nothing to trigger. Just reading what you said and responding. FYI. I have no regrets for the decisions I made. Have done quite well just being "licensed".

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

How in the world is an unlicensed professional going to rate condition or quality of construction better than the appraiser unless the appraiser has their full inspection report and insurance information or bond information?

So this inspector rated it c3 and appraiser rated it c4? Are you serious?

Agree. It's bad enough with agents and they are licensed.

 

[Tiffany Gibbons]

I respect Danny. He is wrong as wrong can be here for the whole nation on the approach he is taking. It is based on unsubstantiated and unsupported anything.

It’s like extra extra extra ordinary assumptions

I think you just wrote the next "version" of USPAP right there. Make sure Dave gets you your cut.