I'm Conflicted - Should I Do These Reports?

[timd354]

House Canary was one where their regression program calculated an adjustment of $40 - $115/SF...nice tight figure

I would not know...I don't use House Canary and the loans we insure (which are mostly GSE loans) due not use House Canary's Agile Appraisals or any of their other products to value the property, so I am not really concerned about what they do at this point in time as I have too many other things that actually affect what we insure to worry about

 

[Eli]

I would not know...I don't use House Canary and the loans we insure (which are mostly GSE loans) due not use House Canary's Agile Appraisals or any of their other products to value the property, so I am not really concerned about what they do at this point in time as I have too many other things that actually affect what we insure to worry about

What do you use? Oh, I forgot, your not an appraiser or acting in that capacity. It is probably top secret anyway.

I know you are probably not performing appraisal practice in TN because that would require a TN appraisal license.

 

[Meandering]

The issue is that the AMCs are piloting these programs, nobody else, and appraisers should just

I would not know...I don't use House Canary and the loans we insure (which are mostly GSE loans) due not use House Canary's Agile Appraisals or any of their other products to value the property, so I am not really concerned about what they do at this point in time as I have too many other things that actually affect what we insure to worry about

Nope,

The issue is that you, and the AMCs, can't get around the simple truth that an interior inspection is needed, and is available, but not to the appraiser.

Plain and simply, there then is no defense for the appraiser to claim piles of EAs have not biased their opinion, by the limitation the client has placed on their inspection and research.

It's pretty easy;

Mr Appraiser how many residential lending appraisals have you performed over the years??? Thousands???
And, how many of those appraisals have you accepted client provided information that could not be verified beyond the client, yet had the potential to be a major factor impacting the market value of a property?
Oh, just a few dozen here for this client?
And why did you not attempt to get the assignment conditions extended to cover the interior inspections you have performed for all those thousands of other appraisals you have performed for other clients?
'Cause your client did not want you to inspect the home on the property, but the client wanted you to rely upon what they represented to you as the interior condition and quality of the home?

Well ghee, do we have to even question what your "peers" do?

Nobdoy swings for USPAP except appraisers. And while banking regulations might suggest some better practices, appraiser's aren't so lucky to have such a wide lattitude for what is or is not a violation.

An appraiser must not allow assignment conditions to limit the scope of work to such a degree that the
assignment results are not credible in the context of the intended use.
Comment
• modify the assignment conditions to expand the scope of work to include gathering the
information; or
If relevant information is not available because of assignment conditions that limit
research opportunities (such as conditions that place limitations on inspection or information
gathering), an appraiser must withdraw from the assignment unless the appraiser can:
• use an extraordinary assumption about such information, if credible assignment results
can still be developed.
An appraiser must not allow the intended use of an assignment or a client’s objectives to cause the assignment results to be biased.

AO 19
Unacceptable Conditions

Certain types of conditions are unacceptable in any assignment because performing an assignment under such
conditions violates USPAP. Specifically, an assignment condition is unacceptable when it:
Unacceptable Conditions
• precludes an appraiser’s impartiality, because such a condition destroys the objectivity and
independence required for the development and communication of credible results;
• limits the scope of work to such a degree that the assignment results are not credible, given the
intended use of the assignment; or
• limits the content of a report in a way that results in the report being misleading.

Oh sorry, doesn't say you can input a pile of EAs, and then the report is suddenly not misleading, especially when the individual has a long history of performing residential lending appraisals where they were required to inspect the interior of the home and provide lots of details and commentary concerning items they are now EAing away.

Nope, can't get past appraisers holding all the liability for these "pilot programs" unless you get TAF on board to change the USPAP.

 

[Eli]

The issue is that the AMCs are piloting these programs, nobody else, and appraisers should just


Nope,

The issue is that you, and the AMCs, can't get around the simple truth that an interior inspection is needed, and is available, but not to the appraiser.

Plain and simply, there then is no defense for the appraiser to claim piles of EAs have not biased their opinion, by the limitation the client has placed on their inspection and research.

It's pretty easy;

Mr Appraiser how many residential lending appraisals have you performed over the years??? Thousands???
And, how many of those appraisals have you accepted client provided information that could not be verified beyond the client, yet had the potential to be a major factor impacting the market value of a property?
Oh, just a few dozen here for this client?
And why did you not attempt to get the assignment conditions extended to cover the interior inspections you have performed for all those thousands of other appraisers you have performed for other clients?
'Cause your client did not want you to inspect the home on the property, but the client wanted you to rely upon what they represented to you as the interior condition and quality of the home?

Well ghee, do we have to even question what your "peers" do?

Nobdoy swings for USPAP except appraisers. And while banking regulations might suggest some better practices, appraiser's aren't so lucky to have such a wide lattitude for what is or is not a violation.

An appraiser must not allow assignment conditions to limit the scope of work to such a degree that the
assignment results are not credible in the context of the intended use.
Comment
• modify the assignment conditions to expand the scope of work to include gathering the
information; or
If relevant information is not available because of assignment conditions that limit
research opportunities (such as conditions that place limitations on inspection or information
gathering), an appraiser must withdraw from the assignment unless the appraiser can:
• use an extraordinary assumption about such information, if credible assignment results
can still be developed.
An appraiser must not allow the intended use of an assignment or a client’s objectives to cause the assignment results to be biased.

AO 19
Unacceptable Conditions

Certain types of conditions are unacceptable in any assignment because performing an assignment under such
conditions violates USPAP. Specifically, an assignment condition is unacceptable when it:
Unacceptable Conditions
• precludes an appraiser’s impartiality, because such a condition destroys the objectivity and
independence required for the development and communication of credible results;
• limits the scope of work to such a degree that the assignment results are not credible, given the
intended use of the assignment; or
• limits the content of a report in a way that results in the report being misleading.

Oh sorry, doesn't say you can input a pile of EAs, and then the report is suddenly not misleading, especially when the individual has a long history of performing residential lending appraisals where they were required to inspect the interior of the home and provide lots of details and commentary concerning items they are now EAing away.

Nope, can't get past appraisers holding all the liability for these "pilot programs" unless you get TAF on board to change the USPAP.

I’ll give JT credit that she realizes the homeowner and borrower and PUBLIC TRUST count. I am not going to say she has done much to help things along that line. I’ll let her toot her own horn there.

I know some on this forum sure haven’t helped public trust and the profession. They don’t care about public trust or the profession.

I have little doubt that is the main reason why there is not more participation on this forum.

 

[timd354]

The issue is that the AMCs are piloting these programs, nobody else, and appraisers should just


Nope,

The issue is that you, and the AMCs, can't get around the simple truth that an interior inspection is needed, and is available, but not to the appraiser.

Plain and simply, there then is no defense for the appraiser to claim piles of EAs have not biased their opinion, by the limitation the client has placed on their inspection and research.

It's pretty easy;

Mr Appraiser how many residential lending appraisals have you performed over the years??? Thousands???
And, how many of those appraisals have you accepted client provided information that could not be verified beyond the client, yet had the potential to be a major factor impacting the market value of a property?
Oh, just a few dozen here for this client?
And why did you not attempt to get the assignment conditions extended to cover the interior inspections you have performed for all those thousands of other appraisals you have performed for other clients?
'Cause your client did not want you to inspect the home on the property, but the client wanted you to rely upon what they represented to you as the interior condition and quality of the home?

Well ghee, do we have to even question what your "peers" do?

Nobdoy swings for USPAP except appraisers. And while banking regulations might suggest some better practices, appraiser's aren't so lucky to have such a wide lattitude for what is or is not a violation.

An appraiser must not allow assignment conditions to limit the scope of work to such a degree that the
assignment results are not credible in the context of the intended use.
Comment
• modify the assignment conditions to expand the scope of work to include gathering the
information; or
If relevant information is not available because of assignment conditions that limit
research opportunities (such as conditions that place limitations on inspection or information
gathering), an appraiser must withdraw from the assignment unless the appraiser can:
• use an extraordinary assumption about such information, if credible assignment results
can still be developed.
An appraiser must not allow the intended use of an assignment or a client’s objectives to cause the assignment results to be biased.

AO 19
Unacceptable Conditions

Certain types of conditions are unacceptable in any assignment because performing an assignment under such
conditions violates USPAP. Specifically, an assignment condition is unacceptable when it:
Unacceptable Conditions
• precludes an appraiser’s impartiality, because such a condition destroys the objectivity and
independence required for the development and communication of credible results;
• limits the scope of work to such a degree that the assignment results are not credible, given the
intended use of the assignment; or
• limits the content of a report in a way that results in the report being misleading.

Oh sorry, doesn't say you can input a pile of EAs, and then the report is suddenly not misleading, especially when the individual has a long history of performing residential lending appraisals where they were required to inspect the interior of the home and provide lots of details and commentary concerning items they are now EAing away.

Nope, can't get past appraisers holding all the liability for these "pilot programs" unless you get TAF on board to change the USPAP.

If what you said was even remotely valid, then USPAP would specifically require an interior inspection and it would also state that the appraiser needed to inspect the subject property personally, but it does not say either of those things.

Additionally, there would have been hundreds or thousands or appraisers bonked by their state boards for performing 2055 exterior-only appraisals, but we know that never happened

 

[timd354]

What do you use? Oh, I forgot, your not an appraiser or acting in that capacity.

I usually don't respond to your nonsense, but I must respond to your lies this time since they directly involve me. As you are aware since you have been told this on numerous occasions, I am a certified residential appraiser and I am the chief appraiser for a major mortgage insurer, so please stop your lies about me and what I do.

 

[Eli]

I usually don't respond to your nonsense, but I must respond to your lies this time since they directly involve me. As you are aware since you have been told this on numerous occasions, I am a certified residential appraiser and I am the chief appraiser for a major mortgage insurer, so please stop your lies about me and what I do.

So you don’t appraise property in TN. I was just confirming that. Do you appraise property anywhere?

 

[J Grant]

That is actually a good thing.

The inspector will have no reason to hide or ignore unfavorable property conditions and it won't matter when the property owner/borrower tells the inspector that the amount of the mortgage loan he is refinancing is $200,000 or that he needs a property value of $250,000 in order to make the deal work.

For the cases where an appraiser would ignore conditions yes , however it is the very small minority of appraisers (if any, I have to take your word for it) who would deliberately ignore an unfavorable property condition - and if they are doing that, why is a client using them? Same goes for an appraiser being influenced by an owner- A minority of stupid or rogue appraisers would have a similar counter part in stupid or rogue inspectors, who miss a property condition or let a friendly RE agent or owner influence them .

Assuming they are trained, a third party inspector can do a good job of notes and photos, and I personally might enjoy the convenience of not running around, even though of course the income would be less. The missing link between appraiser not inspecting- we'll never know what the differential might be. I don't know which direction an appraisal will go in till i inspect. Gray areas such as additions, enclosed porches are they living area or not, the quality of the upgrades, noise on site etc...personally viewing the property is different from looking at the photos of it ; same for same for notes.

In a bifurcated appraisal, I will never know what I "would have appraised it for", had I seen it and walked it in person vs relying on another party's notes and photos.

 

[timd354]

So you don’t appraise property in TN, I was just confirming that.

Another lie, but that is what liars usually do when caught lying, they double down and tell more lies.

 

[Eli]

I usually don't respond to your nonsense, but I must respond to your lies this time since they directly involve me. As you are aware since you have been told this on numerous occasions, I am a certified residential appraiser and I am the chief appraiser for a major mortgage insurer, so please stop your lies about me and what I do.

Are you one of the underwriters who let all those fraudulent loans go through?