• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online  community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

Hybrid

Status
Not open for further replies.
12/14/2017, 12:38pm
2 northwest suburban brothers charged with property appraisal fraud

Two northwest suburban men were charge with fraudulently controlling property appraisals in a scheme to defraud lenders.


Steven L. Garcia, a 45-year-old Schaumburg resident, and his 43-year-old brother, Michael R. Garcia of Streamwood, operated American Financial Mortgage Services Inc., a Schaumburg-based licensed mortgage brokerage, according to the U.S. attorney’s office.


The duo fraudulently caused lenders to make mortgage loans brokered by their company by falsely representing that the supporting property appraisals were performed by independent appraisers, the U.S. attorney’s office said. Instead, the brothers and their employees were selecting and paying the appraisers, managing the appraisal process and influencing property valuation.


Mortgage brokers are prohibited by Federal Housing Administration regulations from having substantive communications with appraisers about property valuations, according to the U.S. attorney’s office. The regulations also prohibit mortgage brokers from ordering or managing and appraisal assignment and paying appraisers.


The Garcia brothers allegedly bypassed these regulations by controlling Residential Appraisal Management Company Inc. through a nominee, according to the U.S. attorney’s office. They used the company to steer appraisals to hand-picked appraisers.


One of the hand-picked appraisers was a relative who gave an appraised value sufficient to support a proposed loan, while falsely representing to lenders that Residential Appraisal Management Company Inc. selected appraisers based on experience and skill, the U.S. attorney’s office said.



The Garcias also fraudulently caused lenders to make mortgage loans to finance fraudulent real estate transactions in which the brothers and their nominees bought and re-sold homes at inflated prices to unqualified nominees who then defaulted on the loans, the U.S. attorney’s office said.

 
A Rule by the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve System, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation on 04/09/2018

The OCC, Board, and FDIC (collectively, the agencies) are adopting a final rule to amend the agencies' regulations requiring appraisals of real estate for certain transactions. The final rule increases the threshold level at or below which appraisals are not required for commercial real estate transactions from $250,000 to $500,000. The final rule defines commercial real estate transaction as a real estate-related financial transaction that is not secured by a single 1-to-4 family residential property. It excludes all transactions secured by a single 1-to-4 family residential property, and thus construction loans secured by a single 1-to-4 family residential property are excluded. For commercial real estate transactions exempted from the appraisal requirement as a result of the revised threshold, regulated institutions must obtain an evaluation of the real property collateral that is consistent with safe and sound banking practices.
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/04/09/2018-06960/real-estate-appraisals


Oh my, there is a need for Relevant Evidence for Appraisal results to be credible under the safe and sound regulation of the IAEG. And still there isn't any relevant evidence that desktop appraisals or even desktop evaluations, nor bi-f appraisals are considered credible by intended users.
 
The FCIC Report then documents scale of this epidemic of loan origination fraud.

One 2003 survey found that 55% of the appraisers had felt pressed to inflate the value of homes; by 2006, this had climbed to 90%. The pressure came most frequently from the mortgage brokers, but appraisers reported it from real estate agents, lenders, and in many cases borrowers themselves. Most often, refusal to raise the appraisal meant losing the client. [FCIC 2011: 91].
https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/201...-appraisal-fraud-baack-bank-execs-profit.html

No issue with pressure now, just give those appraisers "clean" photos. Those numbers will come in.

.
 
https://nbmvt.com/free-appraisal-national-bank-middlebury/

What is your home worth?
Get a free property report and view recent comparables.


What's my house worth?
In this new market, many homeowners are asking, what's my home worth?. At ValueMyHouse, we make getting your house value quick and easy. Simply complete our request form and a ValueMyHouse professional will prepare your electronic report with the market value of your home. Every city is unique in this challenging marketplace, so why not find out what your house is worth, today! Just complete our quick form now!

Find Out What Your Homes Value Is - FREE!

  1. Free Appraisal, INHOUSE APPRAISAL Corporation, Toronto ...
    www.inhouseappraisal.com/freeapppraisal.php
    FREE APPRAISAL. Free Market Valuation!! - Free Market Evaluation!! - Free Appraisal!! How many times have you found a coupon or certificate in your mailbox that entitles you to a "free market valuations or evaluations?
  1. Business Appraisals $399 | OnlineBusinessAppraisal.com
    www.OnlineBusinessAppraisal.com
    Fast, Professional, Independent Expert, Business Valuation, 3 days

CollateralValuationReport.com has found the desktop appraisal to be ideal for:

  • Internal Decision Making for Toxic Assets and/or Loan Portfolios
  • Bankruptcies
  • Divorces
  • Loan Mediations
  • Short Sale Negotiations
  • Non-Federally Related Transactions
Our clients have confirmed that in the above-indicated situations the need for an inspection of the subject property and/or paying for a “full appraisal” is NOT necessary many times; thus, saving both time and money.

Until somebody doesn't like the value.
:rof::rof::rof:


Plenty of low cost or free alternatives out there,

and look, Collateral Valuation Reports says a real appraisal is not necessary.

.
 
I wish the articles about the Garcia brothers included information regarding the years the loans were made and how the scheme was exposed...
 
You should probably start another thread about mortgage fraud because that's a completely different topic that has no bearing in a discussion about the use of hybrid appraisals in mortgage lending.
 
AUG 12, 2014
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) took action against Amerisave Mortgage Corporation, its affiliate, Novo Appraisal Management Company, and the owner of both companies, Patrick Markert, for engaging in a deceptive bait-and-switch mortgage-lending scheme that harmed tens of thousands of consumers. The Bureau found that Amerisave lured consumers by advertising misleading interest rates, locked them in with costly up-front fees, failed to honor its advertised rates, and then illegally overcharged them for affiliated “third-party” services. Amerisave and Novo will provide $14.8 million in refunds to harmed consumers and pay a $4.5 million penalty. Patrick Markert, as an individual, will pay an additional $1.5 million penalty.

Amerisave required consumers to order and give payment authorization information for an appraisal before it would provide a Good Faith Estimate (GFE) for the mortgage, and did not tell consumers until later that the appraisal orders were being referred to its own affiliated company. At closing, Amerisave also charged consumers for “appraisal validation” reports, without disclosing that the service was provided by its affiliate Novo Appraisal Management Company, and that Novo had marked up the reports by as much as 900 percent. Consumers trusted that Amerisave had bargained in good faith for this third-party service, which Amerisave described as being a “special deal” for Amerisave customers.

Charged unfairly inflated prices for services through its affiliate: Amerisave’s owner and CEO, Patrick Markert, received more than three million dollars in indirect profit distributions as a result of requiring consumers to use Novo for marked up “appraisal validations.” Amerisave required consumers to purchase “appraisal validation” reports from Novo, which Novo purchased for an average of $20. Novo then charged Amerisave customers $100 for the service, ultimately passing much of the $80 windfall back to Patrick Markert. Until October 2012, Amerisave failed to make any disclosure that this service was being referred out to Novo, as opposed to being provided by Amerisave itself. The Bureau alleges this conduct was an unfair practice.
https://www.consumerfinance.gov/abo...-million-for-bait-and-switch-mortgage-scheme/

And where do you think they got $20 appraisal validation reports in 2012?

.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at
AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top