Hybrid

[Evincere]

This is exactly what is wrong with these stupid assignments. I've done several and I don't think that I will do any more. The issue is that I end up waiting on the inspection report to come through when I could have
I asked about it and was told by the company that if the same person does the inspection and the valuation then the assignment really falls into the pay category of a 1004, which is higher than these terrible products.
So, the reason for the separate inspection/ appraisal assignment is less pay. It makes sense then to increase the turn times on these and deliver poor reports, that is what they are ordering anyway. Might be the best approach to discourage this product.

Thanks for your very informative post. Just do them because that is what the lender wants. They are for the sake of speed and “modernization” and haven’t you heard? Appraisers are not being savvy or with it and not “supposed” to complain about fees.

That’s a right only lenders retain.

 

[Evincere]

This is exactly what is wrong with these stupid assignments. I've done several and I don't think that I will do any more. The issue is that I end up waiting on the inspection report to come through when I could have
I asked about it and was told by the company that if the same person does the inspection and the valuation then the assignment really falls into the pay category of a 1004, which is higher than these terrible products.
So, the reason for the separate inspection/ appraisal assignment is less pay. It makes sense then to increase the turn times on these and deliver poor reports, that is what they are ordering anyway. Might be the best approach to discourage this product.

Thanks for your very informative post. Just do them because that is what the lender wants. They for the sake of speed and “modernization” and haven’t you heard? Appraisers are not being modern, savvy or with it and not “supposed” to complain about fees.

That’s a right only lenders retain.

(Tongue in cheek)

 

[Evincere]

This is exactly what is wrong with these stupid assignments. I've done several and I don't think that I will do any more. The issue is that I end up waiting on the inspection report to come through when I could have done the whole thing faster (and felt more confident about it) myself.
I asked about it and was told by the company that if the same person does the inspection and the valuation then the assignment really falls into the pay category of a 1004, which is higher than these terrible products.
So, the reason for the separate inspection/ appraisal assignment is less pay. It makes sense then to increase the turn times on these and deliver poor reports, that is what they are ordering anyway. Might be the best approach to discourage this product.

Danny Wiley will not like this post for sure

 

[DWiley]

Danny Wiley will not like this post for sure

I am not sure why you would say that. The pay should be commensurate with the work involved. It is me who has said several times that appraisers should be smart in their pricing. If what we are hearing about SOW and report content is accurate, then some of the fees being tossed around seem outrageous to me, but it is the appraisers in the market place who will eventually set the fees for these services, not the companies doing the engagement.

I will say that if an appraiser is waiting on inspections to be completed, then someone has a system that is broken. We have been doing these a long time. Others have not, and they may not have adequate systems in place to get inspections done efficiently.

 

[JTip]

Site inspection is less than 10% of the work involved in my reports.

$360 (with a rounded up 10% discount applied).

 

[DWiley]

Site inspection is less than 10% of the work involved in my reports.

$360 (with a rounded up 10% discount applied).

If the time to inspect the subject and the comps is only 10% for you, then you are very fortunate. For me, it was certainly more than that, but that likely varies by geographic area. Regardless, that is exactly the kind of time analysis appraisers should be doing. How many will actually do that is the big question.

 

[Carnivore]

If I had a magic wand, I'd waive it and change the grid analysis system to what ResGuy had suggested: Keep the C's/Q's for the subject, rank the comparables superior/similar/inferior to the subject, make the adjustments and describe the ranking differences that warrant the adjustment.

.

Although I understand your logic, I absolutely disagree with that position. Let me give you an example of why i do. The C & Q use assigned to subject would/could carry forward in another Appraisal Assignment within the sales comparison grid if the subject is used as a comparable for that new appraisal Subject. Additionally any comparable you may have used in the prior assignment for the subject might also be used in the new assignment along side the subject previous assignment. Consistency is the key. Eventually the subject and other used comparable would age out.

Everything revolves around the effective date of the subject appraisal. This also applies to the comparable sale/list dates dates.

Maybe I have misunderstood what you wrote.

 

[Evincere]

I am not sure why you would say that. The pay should be commensurate with the work involved. It is me who has said several times that appraisers should be smart in their pricing. If what we are hearing about SOW and report content is accurate, then some of the fees being tossed around seem outrageous to me, but it is the appraisers in the market place who will eventually set the fees for these services, not the companies doing the engagement.

I will say that if an appraiser is waiting on inspections to be completed, then someone has a system that is broken. We have been doing these a long time. Others have not, and they may not have adequate systems in place to get inspections done efficiently.

You're right. I was remiss. We all know and are constantly reminded of how SL does everything right and your long standing intention of enlightening others on these and other matters.

Since your company has been doing them for so long, what's Servicelinks average fee to the Appraiser for these products. No need to be exact or specific, a 3 base ballpark range would be ok.

And please don't say, whatever fee the the Appraiser charges for them because these and other products are usually sent with some sort of acceptance fee/offer. If you are reluctant to mention a specific fee, surely you must know the "average" baseline fee being offered.

 

[DWiley]

You're right. I was remiss. We all know and are constantly reminded of how SL does everything right and your long standing intention of enlightening others on these and other matters.

Since your company has been doing them for so long, what's Servicelinks average fee to the Appraiser for these products. No need to be exact or specific, a 3 base ballpark range would be ok.

And please don't say, whatever fee the the Appraiser charges for them because these and other products are usually sent with some sort of acceptance fee/offer. If you are reluctant to mention a specific fee, surely you must know the "average" baseline fee being offered.

As I said before, the ones we have been doing involve a very different SOW and reporting format. So, comparison of fees would be irrelevant; it would be no more meaningful that comparing 1004 fees to 2055 fees.

 

[Evincere]

As I said before, the ones we have been doing involve a very different SOW and reporting format. So, comparison of fees would be irrelevant; it would be no more meaningful that comparing 1004 fees to 2055 fees.

Presuming the ones you order are not for new loan origination (not yet approved by GSEs because of ongoing pilot program not yet concluded) the OP did not state the specific purpose which logically, cannot be for new loan origination purposes.

Why would the hybrids you order have such a "special" or different SOW or reporting format.

https://www.svclnk.com/originations/valuations/home-equity-valuation-solution/