Hybrid

[Mr Rex]

Lemme get this straight. A desktop or driveby is acceptable but a desktop with another party providing condition info isn't? I gotta get me some of the stuff some folks are smoking or drinking.

 

[George Hatch]

It was you that said "most competent, not me.

Oh my, so you didn't read that sentence in context and were somehow able to interpret a reference that is clearly aim at "the majority of competent appraisers for an assignment" to mean "the most competent appraisers for an assignment"? That is a problem, because then the state would have to define who the most competent appraisers are (for which your public opinion poll would be worthless) and what they would have done *in that assignment*.

You basically want to make the state boards' job impossible. That's not nice. .

Still spinning it George?
.
The SOW acceptability is judged upon what regular users accept as credible. Not by one or two 'clients" no matter how many lemmings they have found.
.

---------------
Again, deliberately taking a term out of context isn't an argument and trying to use that gambit will not be an effective strategy for you. Here's what the SOWR *actually* says:

[/QUOTE]

So - based on what the ASB actually said about it - the relevant subset for your poll would only consist of those userS who regularly use such assignment types and those appraiserS who perform them competently. Not all users, and not all appraisers.

 

[hastalavista]

Good points Denis. Please provide examples where appraisers have ever won or even tied on the regulation battlefield. Are there any examples where the established appraiser trade groups have won on an important regulation battlefield?

Example #1: A clear win-
Two banks in Tennessee request appraisal waivers. One withdraws. The other (Tri-Star) has its request denied. Very vocal opposition by individual appraisers as well as a coalition of appraiser organizations.
This occurred this year.

Example #2: Partial Victory-
The recent Dodd-Frank reform bill (which has passed) originally had language regarding appraisal waivers in rural areas that was very general (one could drive a truck through it). 34 appraiser organizations came together to get the language modified to make it explicit as to what steps a bank must take prior to waiving the appraisal requirement; those clearly identified steps include that the bank must first contact three appraisers on their panel before claiming a waiver and give them the opportunity to bid on the job first.
This occurred this year.

Example #3: What many thought was a win turns out to be something else-
Dodd-Frank and the Appraiser Independence provision. Some very prominent members of this forum were directly involved in lobbying the congress and push through (what was thought to be at the time) significant appraiser protections including C&R. While the legislation passed, the actual content of the legislation was not what many had hoped. And, when the sausage was made in the regulator's pow-wow, what came out was not what had been hoped for (for some of us, what came out was not surprising; for others, it was a major surprise and disappointment).

In the first two examples, appraisers won and tied in the battlefield. In the last, most would consider it a loss.

One last example of appraiser organizations working together to make something happen that would be tough without those organizations working in concert:

The NorCal Chapter of the Appraisal Institute (where I belong) and the National Association of Appraisers (I'm also affiliated with them through my membership with the REAA- a local appraisal organization), thanks to Peter Christensen, both took efforts to get the recent appellate decision in California published (that decision was the one that said the appraiser had no duty to the buyers... only the lender who was the identified client and intended user). If it wasn't for the two organizations requests, the decision would never have been published. Not quite the "regulation battlefield",admittedly so. But another example of where appraisers can make a difference when they work together (and working together through a professional organization or advocacy group amplifies that message).

Appraisers, IMO, are not powerless to make things happen.
But appraisers who affiliate themselves into groups are more powerful than those who don't. And (Greg, I'm not saying this for your benefit but for others) I'm not advocating appraisers to join any one group. I am advocating for appraisers to join a group that aligns with what they want to achieve... or, baring that, find like-minded appraisers and create your own group.

 

[DWiley]

Lemme get this straight. A desktop or driveby is acceptable but a desktop with another party providing condition info isn't? I gotta get me some of the stuff some folks are smoking or drinking.

How dare you use sound logic like that!!

Most of the angst against so-called "hybrids" is really just an emotional reaction to the perception of where fees will likely fall. These red herrings about USPAP and IAG compliance are just attempts to come up with something to discredit the process without addressing the real fear (fees).

 

[George Hatch]

Is this the banking regulators definition of Impartial?

This is a SOW discussion; about what is and isn't an appropriate level of development for a given assignment. Not a discussion about dorking values to meet a predetermined outcome.

The SOWR clearly defines what "scope of work" means within the document, how the credibility is *always measures in the context of the intended use*, and stipulates that

"Communication with the client is required to establish most of the information necessary for problem identification. However the identification of relevant characteristics is a judgement made by the appraiser that requires competency in that type of assignment".

So no, the requirements of the SOWR do not conflict with the CONDUCT section of the ETHICS RULE.

I can't believe I have to keep quoting the relevant sections of USPAP to you two in this discussion in order to contradict your inventive interpretations of the material. None of these are advanced concepts - it's all straight USPAP 101.

 

[DWiley]

Example #1: A clear win-
Two banks in Tennessee request appraisal waivers. One withdraws. The other (Tri-Star) has its request denied. Very vocal opposition by individual appraisers as well as a coalition of appraiser organizations.
This occurred this year.

Example #2: Partial Victory-
The recent Dodd-Frank reform bill (which has passed) originally had language regarding appraisal waivers in rural areas that was very general (one could drive a truck through it). 34 appraiser organizations came together to get the language modified to make it explicit as to what steps a bank must take prior to waiving the appraisal requirement; those clearly identified steps include that the bank must first contact three appraisers on their panel before claiming a waiver and give them the opportunity to bid on the job first.
This occurred this year.

Example #3: What many thought was a win turns out to be something else-
Dodd-Frank and the Appraiser Independence provision. Some very prominent members of this forum were directly involved in lobbying the congress and push through (what was thought to be at the time) significant appraiser protections including C&R. While the legislation passed, the actual content of the legislation was not what many had hoped. And, when the sausage was made in the regulator's pow-wow, what came out was not what had been hoped for (for some of us, what came out was not surprising; for others, it was a major surprise and disappointment).

In the first two examples, appraisers won and tied in the battlefield. In the last, most would consider it a loss.

One last example of appraiser organizations working together to make something happen that would be tough without those organizations working in concert:

The NorCal Chapter of the Appraisal Institute (where I belong) and the National Association of Appraisers (I'm also affiliated with them through my membership with the REAA- a local appraisal organization), thanks to Peter Christensen, both took efforts to get the recent appellate decision in California published (that decision was the one that said the appraiser had no duty to the buyers... only the lender who was the identified client and intended user). If it wasn't for the two organizations requests, the decision would never have been published. Not quite the "regulation battlefield",admittedly so. But another example of where appraisers can make a difference when they work together (and working together through a professional organization or advocacy group amplifies that message).

Appraisers, IMO, are not powerless to make things happen.
But appraisers who affiliate themselves into groups are more powerful than those who don't. And (Greg, I'm not saying this for your benefit but for others) I'm not advocating appraisers to join any one group. I am advocating for appraisers to join a group that aligns with what they want to achieve... or, baring that, find like-minded appraisers and create your own group.

Another example in Tennessee would be limiting the length of time during which a complaint can be filed, a matter driven by the state appraiser coalition.

 

[Joe Flacco]

How dare you use sound logic like that!!

Most of the angst against so-called "hybrids" is really just an emotional reaction to the perception of where fees will likely fall. These red herrings about USPAP and IAG compliance are just attempts to come up with something to discredit the process without addressing the real fear (fees).

I don't see any USPAP or IAG issue but you really think Marion is concerned about the fees? How many people posting in this thread do you really think are going to do these?

"Where fees fall" is going to be where the bottom 20% of appraisers agree to do these. The 20% of the least competent appraisers. Do you believe that it is a good idea to attract the bottom 20% of the appraisers to do 500% more appraisals than they are now?

 

[Joe Flacco]

The bottom 20% are not competent, 20-80 are competent, and top 20% are super competent. Right now, they are probably getting a good mix that excludes the top 20%. Starting the fees at $50 and raising them up a little bit at the time until there are enough appraisers to fill demand is going to end up with the bottom 20% doing these. The bottom 20% will be valuing 500% more collateral.

Does that sound like a good idea?

 

[gregb]

So far, no client has asked me to complete a hybrid report.

Is this sample a typical hybrid report?

https://www.visitcss.com/application/files/3815/2108/3920/CSS-Hybrid-Report-5.10-1.compressed.pdf

 

[DWiley]

I don't see any USPAP or IAG issue but you really think Marion is concerned about the fees? How many people posting in this thread do you really think are going to do these?

"Where fees fall" is going to be where the bottom 20% of appraisers agree to do these. The 20% of the least competent appraisers. Do you believe that it is a good idea to attract the bottom 20% of the appraisers to do 500% more appraisals than they are now?

Actually, I think Marion just likes to argue, especially with certain people.

I think a significant percentage of people who post here will end up doing them, because if things play out the way it looks like they will, "hybrids" are going to replace 20% to 40% of the current 1004 volume. There are plenty of people on this forum who are on my own panel, but routinely state that they do no AMC work. So, the number of people who admit doing "hybrids" will likely be less than those who actually do them.


<<Do you believe that it is a good idea to attract the bottom 20% of the appraisers to do 500% more appraisals than they are now?>> - No, I don't. But I also think the question is based on a false premise - so I don't view it as a relevant question.