Hidden home appraisal middlemen have cost homebuyers $12 billion

[J Grant]

I have ABSOLUTELY ZERO idea what you're talking about.

Then that is a problem!

You are not are that a lender is prohibited from fee slpittign with itself, that a HUD fee split is between a service provider and a third party.

And since, on regular type lending assignments, the direct order lender typically does not procure low bids or fees, but pays C and R, Idk what that example was supposed to be.

 

[George Hatch]

I think some people on here assume that it’s a free and fair market. There’s quite a bit of nuances that come with manipulated markets, you just have to look past econ 101. When you have a handful of companies controlling probably 75% of the orders, The only way to level the playing field is with collective bargaining. And that’s hard to do since most appraisers believe that we’re not even allowed to discuss fees, which is completely untrue.

The concept is a simple one, big business will always try to put small business out of business. Everything makes sense once you realize that. so fight like your life depends on it, because it does. And when scumbag pieces of **** come here and tell you otherwise, call them out on it.

The way I heard it.....
Supposedly the AMC with the largest market share handles just under 5% of the total and the 2nd largest-by-volume AMC is handling half that. And by the time we get to #7 of #8 on the top 10 by-volume list their share is less than 1% of the total. And declining from there.

What I heard amounts to a rumor at this point, although I'm sure there are people who actually know. For the rest of us on the outside, exactly what the real numbers are will be a fact to be discovered or verified.

But if it's true that the AMC market isn't completely dominated by just a handful of AMCs then the "manipulated market" isn't an accurate way of characterizing what has happened.

I just looked at your state's AMC registrations and (manually) counted the number of registrations which are reported by your state appraisal board to be "current". If you were at all interested in this fact you could find out the answer to that question, too.

Here, let me help you out:

https://ncappraisalboard.org/directory/FindAMC.htm

---------------------
My state makes it easier because you can sort by status. In my state there are 192 AMCs with "active" status.

Search Appraisal Management Companies

---------------------
Now the "current" or "active" status doesn't mean they are all handling appraisal assignments on a regular basis. It just speaks to their status with the state. But still.....

Anyways, once someone knows how many numbers of AMCs there are and how many appraisers there are it becomes a simple math equation to calculate the ratio of AMCs to SFR appraisers. That is, if anyone was interested in what those numbers actually look like.

 

[Dublin ohio]

I’ve spent 15 years going to advocacy meetings for my state organizations writing countless letters that I assume were ignored, met with appraisal board members and staff, attended appraisal board meetings on my own dime for travel and hotels, and met with state legislators. Would’ve been nice to have had more than just me and a handful of others at all those events.

I commend you efforts but what were the results

 

[alebrewer]

Nope. The lender was not procuring the appraiser service for $200 when the lender uses an AMC.

Trying to figure out what you're trying to say, so I'm just gonna take a leap. Yes - the lender IS procuring a $200 appraisal service when they engage an AMC (assuming, of course, that the appraiser charged the AMC $200 and that the appraiser's services were adequate for the lender's needs). They are, however (or more appropriately - the buyer is), paying $1k for that $200 appraisal service. Which, to my point, should infuriate ANY lender - especially as regards the exorbitant fee their borrower is paying for the AMC's services.

 

[J Grant]

The way I heard it.....
Supposedly the AMC with the largest market share handles just under 5% of the total and the 2nd largest-by-volume AMC is handling half that. And by the time we get to #7 of #8 on the top 10 by volume list their share is less than 1% of the total. And declining from there.

Exactly what the real numbers are will be a fact to be discovered or verified. But if it's true that the AMC market isn't completely dominated by just a handful of AMCs then the "manipulated market" isn't an accurate way of characterizing what's happened.

I just looked at your state's AMC registrations and (manually) counted the number of registrations which are reported by your state appraisal board to be "current". If you were at all interested in this fact you could find out the answer to that question, too.

Here, let me help you out:

https://ncappraisalboard.org/directory/FindAMC.htm

It seems you heard the Cinderella version from AMC-agenda friendly folk-


Perhaps t listen to what actual boots-on-the-ground appraisers convey. The reality is that for GSE mortgage lending work, a large market share, maybe 70% or more, goes through AMCs. My own experience was that to get to the remaining 20%, approximately the market share of direct lenders took several years, and the same for others I know, and some appraisers who are newer or less experienced never find it.

BTW a direct lender is a lender who simply is not using an AMC. They can change at any time and use an AMC. :like a nightmare, one of my clients tried that and thankfully discarded it and went back to direct order. When they ordered direct, their fee was $550, when they went though an AMC the offered fees for th same work was $350.

 

[J Grant]

Trying to figure out what you're trying to say, so I'm just gonna take a leap. Yes - the lender IS procuring a $200 appraisal service when they engage an AMC (assuming, of course, that the appraiser charged the AMC $200 and that the appraiser's services were adequate for the lender's needs). They are, however (or more appropriately - the buyer is), paying $1k for that $200 appraisal service. Which, to my point, should infuriate ANY lender - especially as regards the exorbitant fee their borrower is paying for the AMC's services.

I have limited time to address this because it goes in circles with you, using certain language and such to go around and around, and it takes all day and all night - fun if I had nothing else to do!

But how des an appriser produce a $200 appraisal service when they use an AMC, when the borrower paid the lender $500 for the appraisal ?( using a 1004 fee as an example )a

 

[chad hampton]

Be careful where you get your information about the amount of work the top five AMC‘s handle. The people spewing that nonsense might not be people of high moral and ethical character.

This thread is even a good example of the dysfunction, when people like Josh and Lori put something together that exposes the corruption in the industry, appraisers on here take shots at them. Same with Phil, he puts out a podcast as often as he can, and from my understanding spent tens of thousands of dollars of his own money to put together an appraiser convention, and even some of you badmouth him. It’s very strange.

 

[alebrewer]

I have limited time to address this because it goes in circles with you, using certain language and such to go around and around, and it takes all day and all night - fun if I had nothing else to do!

But how des an appriser produce a $200 appraisal service when they use an AMC, when the borrower paid the lender $500 for the appraisal ?( using a 1004 fee as an example )a

Because, had the lender gone directly to the appraiser for that same service, it would have cost them... wait for it... $200. The fact that the AMC took $300 doesn't change the report that the appraiser delivered.

 

[George Hatch]

It seems you heard the Cinderella version from AMC-agenda friendly folk-

Maybe so. In the meantime, the number of active AMCs, of which is alleged that a "handful control the market" is a fact which exists IRL somewhere, even if we don't yet know the number.

Let me ask you to exercise some critical thinking: If a lender offers 10 appraisers a substandard fee and all 10 of them reject it, do you think that is an example of those appraisers manipulating the market? Do you think that's an example of collusion or conspiracy? Or is there perhaps an alternate explanation that they are all well informed "sellers" in the market for appraisal services? That their familiarity with the market includes being well informed about the availability of other assignments with more competitive fees?

Because in that hypothetical 100% of them all made the same decision. Now you and I both know an agressive AMC won't just stop at shopping 10 competing vendors. They'll expand their blast to 50 appraisers in the hopes of landing that "one special seller + one special buyer" (aka the one special AMC + one special appraiser).

And the main reason they're able to make their deal is because the internet has enabled them to pit appraisers against each other in the unrelenting competition for their assignments.

 

[George Hatch]

Be careful where you get your information about the amount of work the top five AMC‘s handle. The people spewing that nonsense might not be people of high moral and ethical character.

This thread is even a good example of the dysfunction, when people like Josh and Lori put something together that exposes the corruption in the industry, appraisers on here take shots at them. Same with Phil, he puts out a podcast as often as he can, and from my understanding spent tens of thousands of dollars of his own money to put together an appraiser convention, and even some of you badmouth him. It’s very strange.

Did you look? Do you know what the ratio of AMCs/Appraisers is in your state? Because I (now) know and it wasn't difficult to find. Having drawn the pic in crayon for you YOU should now be more well informed of what you're talking about.

I know, I know. If I'm not swallowing your untruths whole that means you think it's personal. And not a matter of any amount of reason or critical thinking. You don't seem to think there's any room for objectivity in this discussion. We're either for you or against you, no questions asked. No divergence in opinions will be tolerated.