Inspection

[DWiley]

I


It's silly to believe appraisers would have access to comp interiors even if they tried. Why would a homeowner who closed months ago, whose house is not being appraised let some stranger appraiser in? And even if some of them did, it would delay a report for weeks trying to get in each comp.

Whereas the owner of a subject IS letting the inspector in. Which means there is no reason that inspector should not be the appraiser themselves, except for Fannie/Freddie's misguided idea that making something worse is the same as modernizing.

Classic - back to the, "this is the way its always been done" argument A true classic, but not recognized in logic classes as a valid basis for rebuttal.

 

[George Hatch]

I


It's silly to believe appraisers would have access to comp interiors even if they tried. Why would a homeowner who closed months ago, whose house is not being appraised let some stranger appraiser in? And even if some of them did, it would delay a report for weeks trying to get in each comp.

Whereas the owner of a subject IS letting the inspector in. Which means there is no reason that inspector should not be the appraiser themselves, except for Fannie/Freddie's misguided idea that making something worse is the same as modernizing.

Back in the day, I used to knock on every door and interview property owners and (when they weren't home) sometimes a neighbor. I used to look over fences and on occasion even step into the backyard for a sec to see if there was a pool. And believe it or not, I never got into trouble for that. So don't tell me that appraisers are routinely doing everything they *could* to with their verification protocols because I know from personal experience - years of it - that we could all do more if we really wanted to. And if the fee was right.

 

[J Grant]

Obviously, I anticipated the response when I posed the question because I intend to take this line of reasoning further. Several steps further. And I'm going to let you guys lead us down that path with your responses until we get to its inevitable conclusion. And the only way you guys can stop me is to stop responding to these questions.

So now what's the difference between a staff appraiser who will rubber stamp a value because their boss said so (lest they get fired) vs a fee appraiser rubber stamping a value because their client said so (lest they get blacklisted)? Between a staff appraiser who will do a desktop even though they believe it's immoral to appraise a property without personally inspecting the interior/exterior vs a fee appraiser working for the $35 fee split from the big bad AMC?

Of what effect on these decisions are the terms of engagement vs employment ?

There is no difference, neither one should be rubber stamping. But the fact athat this question is being asked, that we recognize a fee appraise can fear being blacklisted or staff appraiser worried about losing their job if they don;t hit value/rubber stamp shows that the AMC conflict of interest is a fail as a third party fire wall (as is allowing lenders or AMC;s to use staff appraisers)

While some ethical companies do not abuse that leverage, many will, and it is the implied threat itself that is the problem. The regulators did not want true appraiser independence from this threat, or they would have designed a different system

IF either staff or fee appaiser is okay with a desktop do it, but staff are employees and more often in the position of having to do forms or products from their employers...imo.

 

[George Hatch]

There is no difference, neither one should be rubber stamping. But the fact athat this question is being asked, that we recognize a fee appraise can fear being blacklisted or staff appraiser worried about losing their job if they don;t hit value/rubber stamp shows that the AMC conflict of interest is a fail as a third party fire wall (as is allowing lenders or AMC;s to use staff appraisers)

While some ethical companies do not abuse that leverage, many will, and it is the implied threat itself that is the problem. The regulators did not want true appraiser independence from this threat, or they would have designed a different system

IF either staff or fee appaiser is okay with a desktop do it, but staff are employees and more often in the position of having to do forms or products from their employers...imo.

You say this, having no personal experience with staff employment in this business. Right?

Do you realize that the larger an org is the more of a paper trail they are leaving when it comes to any pattern of conduct, whether good or bad? The larger the org, the higher exposure and accountability they have to regulatory and investor oversight. However strong or weak that accountability might be.

 

[George Hatch]

Not to mention the point that neither the appraisal dept's at those lenders who operate in-house nor the AMCs who work for the lenders who go that way have any say over what the lending institutions themselves think is sufficient for a given use. These AMCs don't have any more control over what their clients want than the fee appraisers do. They're not telling the lenders what to do. At most, all they're doing is the same thing any fee appraiser who is working off of direct engagement is doing; "these are the types of assignments I/we offer - you decide what you want to buy".

 

[ucbruin]

Non sequitur, anyone?

I liked the job but I didn't think I had what it took to do it for 30 years. BTW, I don't think most appraisers realize how many parallels there are between what we do vs what the cops do.

Well then....
Maybe not the non sequitur you think it is....

 

[George Hatch]

Trust me when I tell you that the reasons I didn't think I could do 30 years in that business have nothing to do with the reasons an appraiser might think that about appraising.

 

[DWiley]

They're not telling the lenders what to do. At most, all they're doing is the same thing any fee appraiser who is working off of direct engagement is doing; "these are the types of assignments I/we offer - you decide what you want to buy".

Exactly. It is a popular narrative, in this and other social media sites, for appraisers to claim that AMCs are "pushing" so-called "hybrid" or "bifurcated" processes, when few things are further from the truth.

 

[ucbruin]

Back in the day, I used to knock on every door and interview property owners and (when they weren't home) sometimes a neighbor. I used to look over fences and on occasion even step into the backyard for a sec to see if there was a pool. And believe it or not, I never got into trouble for that. So don't tell me that appraisers are routinely doing everything they *could* to with their verification protocols because I know from personal experience - years of it - that we could all do more if we really wanted to. And if the fee was right.

Many things were different back in the day....

As an aside....
I'm willing to do the inspection portion of any new product should the price be agreeable to me....
If the price is right, I'd perform the appraisal portion of any new product....

 

[George Hatch]

I'd go so far as to suggest that in some cases it will be the users which are driving the evolution, not the appraisers or AMCs. That much should be self-evident.