Freddie Mac vs Appraiser Bias

[Dale Floyd]

There is a tendency among some to think "Well, I wasn't involved, so I guess no appraisers were involved."

I suppose you aimed that at me, since I am now the respondent. I will point out that you were indeed involved - that is true - And now? You work for them.

In the day you refer, many with the NAIFA, ASFMRA, as well as others, had discussions and sent input but there was no real seat at that table. I have heard that NDA spiel quite a few times, and it gets old and hollow. Nothing has really changed today, and there are no independent thinkers involved because that's not how the political game works.

It wasn't long ago you reminded me that appraisers need to change or get left behind. I think we all get that and understand it perfectly. Lord knows, we are the poster children of adaptation since 1991. Perhaps a day will come when our opinions and experiences are valued more before bigger pockets make changes impacting us. I don't recall you, nor anybody up there, soliciting our input about making the processes better. Wouldn't that be a good idea? I realize some would be all negative and critical about everything, but I also think a few of us could be a great source to help the digestion process much better about changes being considered that affects us the most.

I do understand what Sadie is saying. Doesn't matter if something is allowed or not - Once the changes are enacted, and the processes have barbed wire in the flow, we are the ones who get the raw end of the deal. It can be frustrating.

 

[Sadie]

Well, in Sadie's case, I don't think it is complicated at all. The lenders/AMCs she is working with don't want reports signed by trainees, and they police that policy by having rules in the review/upload systems that prevent such a report from being uploaded. I never thought that Sadie was lying - she, like many, just did not understand how the systems work. The lenders/AMCs who have systems that block reports signed by trainees view that as a feature, not a bug. The GSEs themselves allow and promote the use of trainees but lenders may have more restrictive policies.

As for appraiser involvement in systems, that happens to a much greater degree that most know. There is a tendency among some to think "Well, I wasn't involved, so I guess no appraisers were involved." When the original UAD rolled out I was part of a group of field appraisers from all over the country that met with the GSEs in Washington, DC to preview it and provide input. Most had no idea that had happened, because we all signed NDAs and could not discuss it.

How many times do I have to type this out for you to understand? It is not the clients, it is the software, same client, different software and the trainee signature passes.

 

[DWiley]

There is a tendency among some to think "Well, I wasn't involved, so I guess no appraisers were involved."

I suppose you aimed that at me, since I am now the respondent. I will point out that you were indeed involved - that is true - And now? You work for them.

In the day you refer, many with the NAIFA, ASFMRA, as well as others, had discussions and sent input but there was no real seat at that table. I have heard that NDA spiel quite a few times, and it gets old and hollow. Nothing has really changed today, and there are no independent thinkers involved because that's not how the political game works.

It wasn't long ago you reminded me that appraisers need to change or get left behind. I think we all get that and understand it perfectly. Lord knows, we are the poster children of adaptation since 1991. Perhaps a day will come when our opinions and experiences are valued more before bigger pockets make changes impacting us. I don't recall you, nor anybody up there, soliciting our input about making the processes better. Wouldn't that be a good idea? I realize some would be all negative and critical about everything, but I also think a few of us could be a great source to help the digestion process much better about changes being considered that affects us the most.

I do understand what Sadie is saying. Doesn't matter if something is allowed or not - Once the changes are enacted, and the processes have barbed wire in the flow, we are the ones who get the raw end of the deal. It can be frustrating.

That was not aimed at you. It was just an observation based on lots of interactions with appraisers since the UAD was introduced.

Again, not aimed at you, but one of the things that I personally find frustrating is those who routinely post comments like, "They don't understand what we do because they don't do it every day. What they need to do is bring in some REAL boots on the street appraisers." But, as soon as that happens, those same folks immediately say, "That person is not a REAL appraiser anymore - they work for the man" as if by taking a job at some sort of corporate entity they suddenly forget the 20, 30, or 40 years of experience they had out in the field.

As new things are contemplated, there is a big process. First there is a proof of concept phase. Then a testing phase. Those usually take at least a year or two, and in that process there is an incredible amount of interaction with appraisers, and those interactions often lead to changes in programs. Some things just die on the vine and never get implemented at all. But, even if that process involves 1,000 appraisers, that is a very small percentage of the appraisers who regularly do GSE work.

Since I work primarily from Nashville, I still have a lot of contact with appraisers that I have known for decades. We meet for lunch, catch up on calls, etc. quite often. I have even had some of them come and talk to our team about various aspects of "in the field live" from their perspective.

And what Sadie is facing is nothing new, and it was not created by any of the current systems. I fought that same battle (lenders accepting trainee reports) at my own firm long before UAD was rolled out.

 

[Tim Hicks (Texas)]

That was not aimed at you. It was just an observation based on lots of interactions with appraisers since the UAD was introduced.

Again, not aimed at you, but one of the things that I personally find frustrating is those who routinely post comments like, "They don't understand what we do because they don't do it every day. What they need to do is bring in some REAL boot on the street appraisers." But, as soon as that happens, those same folks immediately say, "That person is not a REAL appraiser anymore - they work for the man" as if by taking a job at some sort of corporate entity that suddenly forget the 20, 30, or 40 years of experience they had out in the field.

As new things are contemplated, there is a big process. First there is a proof of concept phase. Then a testing phase. Those usually take at least a year or two, and in that process there is an incredible amount of interaction with appraisers, and those interactions often lead to changes in programs. Some things just die on the vine and never get implemented at all. But, even if that process involves 1,000 appraisers, that is a very small percentage of the appraisers who regularly do GSE work.

Since I work primarily from Nashville, I still have a lot of contact with appraisers that I have known for decades. We meet for lunch, catch up on calls, etc. quite often. I have even had some of them come and talk to our team about various aspects of "in the field live" from their perspective.

And what Sadie is facing is nothing new, and it was created by any of the current systems. I fought that same battle (lenders accepting trainee reports) at my own firm long before UAD was rolled out.

Yeah, but you still work for "the man."

 

[Dale Floyd]

That was not aimed at you. It was just an observation based on lots of interactions with appraisers since the UAD was introduced.

Again, not aimed at you, but one of the things that I personally find frustrating is those who routinely post comments like, "They don't understand what we do because they don't do it every day. What they need to do is bring in some REAL boot on the street appraisers." But, as soon as that happens, those same folks immediately say, "That person is not a REAL appraiser anymore - they work for the man" as if by taking a job at some sort of corporate entity that suddenly forget the 20, 30, or 40 years of experience they had out in the field.

As new things are contemplated, there is a big process. First there is a proof of concept phase. Then a testing phase. Those usually take at least a year or two, and in that process there is an incredible amount of interaction with appraisers, and those interactions often lead to changes in programs. Some things just die on the vine and never get implemented at all. But, even if that process involves 1,000 appraisers, that is a very small percentage of the appraisers who regularly do GSE work.

Since I work primarily from Nashville, I still have a lot of contact with appraisers that I have known for decades. We meet for lunch, catch up on calls, etc. quite often. I have even had some of them come and talk to our team about various aspects of "in the field live" from their perspective.

And what Sadie is facing is nothing new, and it was created by any of the current systems. I fought that same battle (lenders accepting trainee reports) at my own firm long before UAD was rolled out.

My apologies, as I didn't intend to sound snarky. My point was intended to convey - You were us, and now you are with them - Therefore you (of all "them") should know what we are feeling sometimes. The frustrations of what Sadie is saying, aren't any different than what Danny would be saying if you were still doing this full time. I was just making the point.

And when you and I first met at those initial classes required for our licenses/certifications in 1991, we had no idea what this would look like in 2022 or where we would be. But here we are, and we are now on different sides of the table many times. Certainly I think you would agree that the process has been put into a blender at times, and the chunks left in the puree weren't expected to be there. The process could be better - communication could be better - a more inclusive and transparent migration would definitely be welcomed by the ones who suffer the most by the changes made.

Side note for the other readers - My bank used to hire the Wiley firm back in the day for appraisals in the Metro Davidson area, and the man is a good appraiser.

 

[DWiley]

My apologies, as I didn't intend to sound snarky. My point was intended to convey - You were us, and now you are with them - Therefore you (of all "them") should know what we are feeling sometimes. The frustrations of what Sadie is saying, aren't any different than what Danny would be saying if you were still doing this full time. I was just making the point.

And when you and I first met at those initial classes required for our licenses/certifications in 1991, we had no idea what this would look like in 2022 or where we would be. But here we are, and we are now on different sides of the table many times. Certainly I think you would agree that the process has been put into a blender at times, and the chunks left in the puree weren't expected to be there. The process could be better - communication could be better - a more inclusive and transparent migration would definitely be welcomed by the ones who suffer the most by the changes made.

Side note for the other readers - My bank used to hire the Wiley firm back in the day for appraisals in the Metro Davidson area, and the man is a good appraiser.

Thanks for the very kind words

Maybe I can convince the state or the AI that I am not a real appraiser anymore and cut out those fees/dues

 

[Zoe]

Thanks for the very kind words

Maybe I can convince the state or the AI that I am not a real appraiser anymore and cut out those fees/dues

LOL, maybe you would have better chance convincing them of something else, like taking up for appraisers and separating fees and drop hybrids. You can just keep wasting your money. LOL

 

[Zoe]

I am not real sure it's your money your wasting. You have incredible brain. Use it for good. Don't turn into Joan. Don't change your name to Joan W.

 

[George Hatch]

I think it's unfortunate that most of you can't seem to grasp the fact that if the companies that hired DW hadn't hired him then they would have hired someone else, almost certainly of lesser technical competency and with less experience (if any) as a fee appraiser. I can practically guarantee that the current perspectives percolating at the GSEs right now would look a lot different if Freddie had hired someone else, especially as it relates to the "appraisers are racists" tropes. He'll at least look at both sides of the arguments and give serious consideration to the data, which is an attribute that's going to be in short supply among the corporate types he is working with.

Be honest with yourselves: would you REALLY have preferred that either the AMC or Freddie had hired someone who had never operated a fee shop and who wasn't as technically competent with - and personally committed to - our appraisal standards as DW? Enough to come into a hostile forum like this and engage directly with his critics? Nobody else in the upper mgt of the GSEs has ever come here before.

Even USPAP itself would look different if not for DWs past service on the ASB and more recent interactions with them, and that "different" would not have worked to the benefit of appraisers. IMO you guys are barking up the wrong tree.

 

[Zoe]

I think it's unfortunate that most of you can't seem to grasp the fact that if the companies that hired DW hadn't hired him then they would have hired someone else, almost certainly of lesser technical competency and with less experience (if any) as a fee appraiser. I can practically guarantee that the current perspectives percolating at the GSEs right now would look a lot different if Freddie had hired someone else, especially as it relates to the "appraisers are racists" tropes. He'll at least look at both sides of the arguments and give serious consideration to the data, which is an attribute that's going to be in short supply among the corporate types he is working with.

Be honest with yourselves: would you REALLY have preferred that either the AMC or Freddie had hired someone who had never operated a fee shop and who wasn't as technically competent with - and personally committed to - our appraisal standards as DW? Enough to come into a hostile forum like this and engage directly with his critics? Nobody else in the upper mgt of the GSEs has ever come here before.

Even USPAP itself would look different if not for DWs past service on the ASB and more recent interactions with them, and that "different" would not have worked to the benefit of appraisers. IMO you guys are barking up the wrong tree.

I am not sure GSE's have access to HMDA data on TIL disclosures. DW could probably confirm if they do. I know HUD has the HMDA data that discloses things like race.. I am thinking only HUD has that data. I could be totally wrong. When I say only HUD, it's not true because obviously the banks making home loans keep a copy. They are required to give the disclosures so you know they keep a copy.