Hybrid

[George Hatch]

It's not a deflection. You're mistaking an effect for being the cause.

Why are the clients of an AMC that patronize the lowest bidders using that AMC? Why aren't the AMCs that do offer some version of cost-plus not getting a larger share of the market?

As for

I was being a bit sarcastic.

That's not true. Both you and Marion have repeatedly implied that I'm actively working against appraisers' interests and, having repeatedly and directly denied it, I'm getting fairly annoyed at the repeated accusations against my integrity. If either of you is interested in refraining from such accusations in the future I'd greatly appreciate it.

I might be an idiot, but I'm not a liar.

 

[J Grant]

George, your posts speak for themselves as they so often defend paying appraisers poorly..what am I supposed to interpret that as? How is that working in the appraiser best interest? Maybe try reading your posts as if you did not write them?

I believe you have integrity and perhaps don't realize then that when you refuse to acknowledge the fact that is AMC's profiting from the fee split that is teh engine driving fees for their work down rather than just over supply, - your refusal to acknowledge that what do you think that results in as far as supporting appraisers ?

I do not align myself with Marion btw and support other posts you make but on this topic we are at odds.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

So it begs the question: AQB Why are you even responding to these cyclic markets at all?

Under pressure...Kowtowing to the "needs" of the bank and AMC community, not the needs of appraisers or the public.

"Bidding" doesn't violate bank rules per se , rather implicitly, signifies the banks thumbing their collective noses at the IAG and regulators by choosing appraisers on the basis of fee or turn time, rather than doing it by the book. That is, appraisers should be chosen by their qualifications and competency. Nothing in a bid relates to either and the assumption therefore is that you won't bid if not competent??? Really? How many times do you bid without the scantiest information. And by isolating the LO from the selection process, often the ordering department or the AMC doesn't know what they are even ordering.

Ordering a 1004 on a new house on existing property that has other buildings, homes, or even a commercial building usually happens out of ignorance or intent to deceive. I was sent three such properties to appraise in the past few years. Two with commercial dog kennels and one with a cabinet shop.

 

[Eli]

George, your posts speak for themselves as they so often defend paying appraisers poorly..what am I supposed to interpret that as? How is that working in the appraiser best interest? Maybe try reading your posts as if you did not write them?

I believe you have integrity and perhaps don't realize then that when you refuse to acknowledge the fact that is AMC's profiting from the fee split that is teh engine driving fees for their work down rather than just over supply, - your refusal to acknowledge that what do you think that results in as far as supporting appraisers ?

I do not align myself with Marion btw and support other posts you make but on this topic we are at odds.

I can’t explain it girlfriend. Him and a few other posters would not like the Tennesse appraiser coalition. They sure as hell would not like the Louisiana Governor.
I like both.

 

[J Grant]

It's not a deflection. You're mistaking an effect for being the cause.

Why are the clients of an AMC that patronize the lowest bidders using that AMC? Why aren't the AMCs that do offer some version of cost-plus not getting a larger share of the market?

.

Because some of those lender clients are scumbags? In the news for ripping off consumers and bailed out after the crash and nothing has changed on their end? Individuals at the banks may own stock in the AMC's they send work to? Fill in the blank, reason...surely it profits or benefits them to do so ...the fact that many of the big box lenders who use or own or align with bottom feeders AMC are still in the news for fraudulent practices with consumers ( or who were in the past ) is not exactly a ringing endorsement for their using low pay AMC's.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

they so often defend paying appraisers poorly..

JG has a point there. This is far from an open market so it is a little disingenuous to suggest we have a level playing field. Highly qualified appraisers compete against newbies or incompetent churn and burn artists in a bid system solely based on fee and turn time. That violates AIG requirements to select appraisers on quality. And quality counts or there wouldn't be a single John Deere tractor sold in America. We'd all be using Mihindra's or other cheap tractors. Same difference. The bank is tasked with matching the appraiser to the project, without considering fee. They ignore it in ~99% of banks.

 

[Carnivore]

GSE database on SFR is huge, going back many years. My guess is the GSE may have a 1st page URAR(actually a complete URAR) on many of the Desktops that are authorized for a Lender to use in lieu of 1004 are a result of that database. The unlicensed Harry the Aluminum Can Picker as an inspector is a cheap way to get a new front photo, some other data...and the Appraiser does the Standard one & two stuff Harry cant do. Both are cheap..both are done quickly. The appraisers part shouldn't be quicker, but it will be because Skippy is alive and well. The advantage now is the Appraiser does not have dead-time driving around to the subject and all comparable. That makes sense to me.

as a side note: I am surprised that the 2055 demand did not rise dramatically during the REFI Boom. Maybe it did!

So my prediction is we will always have the 1004(or some new version) and Desktops and BF's will be part of that mix of the total need.

Yes, your being set up for the next crash, because there are so many who will simply not comply with the record keeping Rule, meaning some never play by the rules.

Appraisers are not the only ones who are going to suffer. AMC's will really fill the effects of this move to, less is more. Many will fall to the wayside or move on to some other SERVICE industry.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

The 2055 was the most violated form in existence IMHO. Fannie basically used this drive by product with a set in stone requirement that the appraiser had access to reliable information about the interior and its condition. Instead 9 of 10 appraisers simply assumed away the interior as a reflection of the exterior condition which was not necessarily the case.

am surprised that the 2055 demand did not rise dramatically during the REFI Boom. Maybe it did!

I am surprised more appraisers didn't get hammered in reviews or before the board over them.

 

[Carnivore]

Because some of those lender clients are scumbags? In the news for ripping off consumers and bailed out after the crash and nothing has changed on their end? Individuals at the banks may own stock in the AMC's they send work to? Fill in the blank, reason...surely it profits or benefits them to do so ...the fact that many of the big box lenders who use or own or align with bottom feeders AMC are still in the news for fraudulent practices with consumers ( or who were in the past ) is not exactly a ringing endorsement for their using low pay AMC's.

Perfect Example is Wells Fargo...look what they have done and still are doing. The one Gal Stood out, she was a VP for something like personal accounts.. Her giant department crated thousands up on thousands(or more likely 10's of thousands) in people's names who did not know it.

What happened: Well good ole Wells paid huge fines, The VP was fired but grabbed her Golden Parachute of 130+ million dollars after she cleaned out her desk and signed up for unemployment. plus 5,000 worker ants were fired.

Then again same Bank just got hit again for shenanigans.

It never ends! Your a Peon...don't ever forget that!

 

[George Hatch]

Because some of those lender clients are scumbags? In the news for ripping off consumers and bailed out after the crash and nothing has changed on their end? Individuals at the banks may own stock in the AMC's they send work to? Fill in the blank, reason...surely it profits or benefits them to do so ...the fact that many of the big box lenders who use or own or align with bottom feeders AMC are still in the news for fraudulent practices with consumers ( or who were in the past ) is not exactly a ringing endorsement for their using low pay AMC's.

Okay, so where lies the real problem here? Which AMCs do you believe would refuse to bid for a lender's work on the cost-plus basis if that's what that one lender wanted? Which AMCs do you think would withdraw from the market altogether if Cost-plus was mandated by law or regulation? Name one and explain why you think they'd stick with the bundled fee model in the face of direct opposition from their own customers.

How did the appraisers in the COW states end up having the different experience in fees than most of the other states? How did the appraisers in California end up having even lower fees than are common elsewhere? What is the dominant variable in action here that's been leading to the different results? Has that variable been AMCs or lenders somehow behaving differently in the COW states (thus resulting in higher fees) or California (lower fees)? Or has it been the result of the different supply/demand factors - differences so profound that not even the AMCs were able to find a way around it?

The answers to these questions are not only self-evident, but indicative of the most likely outcome going forward UNLESS the gov't steps in to intervene in this sector of commerce as an explicit concession to our little special interest group.

I'm not a jerk for being capable of seeing what has been happening, why it's been happening, or what the most likely outcome is when these situations are taken to their logical conclusions.

If in 2008 the lenders had been faced with an acute shortage of appraisers would they have still trusted their appraisal procurement to an AMC that might have several different customers competing for services from the same appraisers? If there had been a shortage at the outset would the AMCs have gotten very far with their take-it-or-leave-it fee splits or would they have been FORCED by the lack of leverage in the market to pay higher fees in order to attract their share of vendors? What do you think?