Hybrid

[Rick Stillman]

Let's be blunt. The effort for 25 years was to "improve" the profession via strict rules, licensing, meticulous research and detailed reporting, and punishment of people for not "doing it right". Tantamount to that effort was the elimination of the "letter appraisal"...Now we have the mindset that we can caveat the appraisal down to a bare bones and therefore with exacting wordsmithing, we can provide a letter appraisal which is "bullet proof" and completely divorced from the idea that the ultimate goal is to provide a CREDIBLE value. The notion that there is some broad range of possible value which might or might not be captured with a skeleton report (both Std 1, and Std. 2) is difficult for me to grasp. So if my hybrid turns out to be dead wrong then my protection is that "the devil made me do it" and within the "scope of work" and the "intended use" [which is merely to serve as a compliance document for a bank], I'm fine...no problem, no liability, nary a chance someone will come after me. yeah, right.

Bears repeating Terrel!!!

 

[Rick Stillman]

Common sense tells me that if there is a widespread appraisal quality problem due to low fees and short turn times, evidence of this surely could be and would be uncovered. At my company alone, we have had almost 1 million loans files come through since I began my time here, yet I have not seen any evidence of any negative impact on appraisal quality because of AMC involvement in the process or because of low fees or turn times.

You should understand that if someone was able to provide credible evidence that appraisal quality suffers because of either AMC involvement or low fees, I would be glad to implement policy changes to address those issues and would also be glad to make my peers aware of that evidence and encourage them to act on that evidence. However, the constant unsupported yapping from you and other appraisers making such claims is of absolutely no value and is actually counterproductive in that it causes appraisers to lose credibility and actually causes some people in the secondary market to stop listening to you guys altogether.

Um, you're kidding right?

Contact me (I'm easy to find) and I'll send you a sample of quality work. There is an extreme chance it will have little resemblance to the work you routinely see!

Some here brag they do 60+ jobs a month. Do you even think for a micro second they do "quality" work? Common sense man... Work load has tripled from 15 years ago - fees are half of what they should be. Something has to give - and it does.

 

[Joe Flacco]

There is no evidence because standard 1 compliance goes unchecked. I don't know how many times I gotta say that. Standard 1 goes unchecked. Appraisal development goes unchecked and is assumed to be good. Appraisal development is what requires skill. Is what requires market expertise. This is all assumed to be good. So I don't know what is being checked when people talk about appraisal "quality". I don't know what people are comparing when they say "impact on appraisal quality".

Does it make sense to assume that the appraisal is good and then based on that come to the conclusion that the appraisal is good?

 

[Joe Flacco]

It is basically if all the boilerplate is in the report then it is "quality". It is ridiculous.

 

[Joe Flacco]

I don't understand how "1 mile radius" is adequate for SR 2-2(a) and I don't understand how "1 mile radius" indicates compliance with SR 1-2(e).

 

[Artemis Fowl]

The entire industry was up in arms over 1 certified appraiser in a state sending 20 trainees all over the state to provide material information for use in an appraisal report. Many states adopted max # of trainees a cert appraiser could have because of it.

But now some seem fine with untrained/unlicensed random people running all over the state providing material information for use in an appraisal report.

I'd say I'm shocked, but nothing shocks me in this professional anymore.

Suspect there's more to this story than your simple representation to support a point. SOWR and signed Certs maybe?

 

[J Grant]

https://theappraisercoach.com/do-third-party-inspectors-violate-USPAP

He's addressing ext "inspection" hybrids, but some relevant points. Calling observing a house from a car or street an "inspection" is a bit much but the term is commonly used. On an interior inspection, it really is an inspection, both inside and outside a property where one walks the site and looks at pools, barns etc .

I think the AMC;s, the lawyers advising and Fannie are doing a dance around USPAP for bifurcated. While USPAP does not require an inspection, in a bifurcated an inspection takes place. The question is, who does the inspection, and does inspecting the subject constitute significant appraisal assistance ( in the above FAQ, inspecting a subject is considered Tier III appraisal activities /yes.

USPAP says only an appraiser must be named if they contribute significant appraisal assistance. But to not be misleading , if an individual who is not an appraiser contributes significant appraisal assistance that should be disclosed one assumes.

The bifurcated report will have a check box and disclosure that the appraiser did not inspect, that a third party inspected ( not named with their name?)

The fact that an appraiser did not inspect is disclosed, however, did the inspection contribute significant assistance...lawyer assisted dancing around what that means, since "data collection" is not considered Tier III significant appraisal assistance. Danny is referring to the appraisal inspection as "data collection". That is deliberate to remove inspection from considered contributing significant appraisal assistance, therefore a non appraiser person can do it.

The AMC's / their attorneys prevailed in evading C and R regulatory intent by getting the regulations changed so their own data could be considered C and R ( in original C and R law in DF that was not in there).

I assume they will be successful in this too, since Fannie itself is participating and saying we have a way around USPAP and what contributes significant assistance - from now on call a subject inspection "Data collection" and as long as the inspector does not contribute judgement and opinions about the subject, that;s all it is. I read an article that the inspector will not be assigning a condition or quality rating or any other kind of judgement or opinion, If the roof is a POS caving in the inspector won't mark it C 6 or ety will check mark it older /repair issue and phot it. Will the appraiser make the decision to subject a property to inspection and repair ? Only the appraiser wilt make judgement and opinions based on the third party "data collection" (inspection), to avoid saying the inspector was involved in appraisal practice.


Amazingly clever...by having a non appraiser inspect, they avoid having to say a trainee or appraiser contributed significant appraisal assistance, and thus not name the inspector, Going forward by calling a subject inspection "data collection", they can deny the subject inspection itself is a significant appraiser TIER III activity....(even though the USPAP FAQ says it is ) The fact for lender work Fannie,FHA lender regs required a cert appraiser to inspect reversed on this basis.

“Tier III” activities). They are outlined in the FAQ referenced above as “the contribution…of substance to the development of the assignment results. In other words, the individual must contribute to the valuation analysis in a noteworthy way” (ibid). USPAP even goes on to describe the specific work that is considered to be worthy of a statement. “Examples of contributions made by appraisers that constitute significant real property appraisal assistance include the identification of comparable properties and data, inspection of the subject property and comparables, estimating accrued depreciation, or forecasting income and expenses” (ibid). Using this definition alone, one would be led to believe that a third-party inspector should be identified in the certifications. Or, should he/she?

 

[Carnivore]

Just an FYI - they do not require it, but the law is an AMC can't demand you remove the fee stated in your report. It is not yet a requirement.

Got it thanks...I just looked at it and its as you said pending...cool

For anyone that is interested here is the Guidance from the NCAB to NC Appraisers concerning Desktops/BIFU type reports.

http://ncappraisalboard.org/Guidanc...=Guidance+Concerning+Desktop+Appraisal+Orders

 

[Deleted member 130081]

There are five professional appraiser organizations, which one do you belong to?

None. I was so close to joining the AGA, that I actually came on here and declared I had. (Sorry folks, that's the truth of it, premature epostualtion) But, at the moment of actually writing the check, I stopped and realized an important factor which is, unless membership within a single appraiser organization reaches a critical mass, my dues are money down the drain, at least in terms of what I found valuable in paying them. So instead, I decided to see if my peers were interested in joining too. To answer that question, I came here, as well as other forums, as well as just talking to peers as I have had the chance. What I discovered is, interest in organizing is very low. It ranges from hell no to maybe to not sure with a zillion excuses for all. I did however, find a few peers open to the idea, and many who are currently members of various organizations.

My conclusions are these: #1 - Until appraisers organize into a single voice, special interests will continue to dictate the profession - there is no other option that has a reasonable chance of producing a favorable result. #2 - Currently membership is low, the organizations that are out there are fragmented from each other and many organizations are tainted by special interests - somehow, someway, consolidation is needed. #3 - the first step is to change the narrative - appraisers need to start talking about the issue, so they can realize how and why organization is the only viable option, as obviously people need to decide to do it before they will actually do it. So, for all those reasons, I have been coming on here in the last few months, you know, The Appraisers Forum, and pitching the idea any way I can. I have tried it all. I've tried being nice, reasonable, thoughtful and I've tried being shocking and insulting, ANYTHING that might trigger a response from a group of people that, let's face it, need a slap in the face to wake up.

So that's my story, hate me if you want to. I love this business and it breaks my heart to see it be what it is, rather than what it could, and should be.

 

[George Hatch]

Sorry to break it to you, but even if you could draw in every salaried appraiser and every appraiser working in government it still wouldn't be enough heads to buy enough politicians to keep them bought and advocating for our interests over that of our primary clients - the lenders.

------------------------
And that's putting aside completely the archtypical appraiser personality.

Why do most fee appraisers get into that business? To work for themselves.

Why do most of them want to work for themselves? Because we don't work well with others.

If we all had social skills and the need for the organizational identity we'd be in a different line of work. Or we'd work on staff for a company or a government agency. In fact, it is our apathy for organizational structure and power that enables us to do our thing even when we know the result is going to **** off everyone in the transaction. Including our own clients.

Then there's the "just say no" point, which is just another name for a picket line. That line only holds to the extent the individuals sacrifice their own personal interest (make money today) in favor of the group (make more money over time). Appraisers are already demonstrating that if the choice is working for less vs not working at all for weeks at a time, most of them will take working for less. The purpose of a picket line is not to punish the employer, it's to keep the employees - their peers - from acting in their own interests. Your union cannot enforce a picket line to prevent your peers from crossing the email point of contact to accept and submit assignments.

That's not talking poo, it's "appraising" our own personal attributes as individuals and as a group.