Intimidation....I Will Not Be Silenced

[Zee_in_AZ]

APPRAISERS: THIS IS EXACTLY THE PROBLEM WITH THE AMC MODEL.


I recently received a compliance letter from Solidifi because they objected to comments I made publicly criticizing Clear Capital and the treatment of independent appraisers.
Apparently, criticizing an AMC can result in another AMC putting an appraiser “ON-HOLD” and demanding an explanation.
And that perfectly illustrates the point I was making.

For years, the AMC model has increasingly resembled a master/servant relationship rather than a relationship between independent businesses.
Accept our fee. Meet our turn time. Answer our endless revision requests. Follow our administrative requirements. Absorb the liability. Carry the license. Carry the insurance. Carry the overhead. And apparently, now, be careful what you publicly say about another AMC.

No.

An independent appraiser is not an AMC employee. We are not their servants, and we damn sure are not their slaves.

I haven't performed lending appraisal work in more than two years. I walked away from that business deliberately. I don't need an AMC panel, and I don't need permission from an AMC compliance committee to express my opinion about what has happened to this profession.

If criticizing the treatment of appraisers results in being removed from an AMC panel, remove me.

Permanently.

The irony is almost too good: send an independent professional a letter demanding that he explain his criticism of AMC control while simultaneously threatening his access to the AMC's work unless his response satisfies a committee.

You couldn't have demonstrated my point any better if you tried.

Independent means independent.
Appraisers need to remember that.
And AMCs need to remember it too.

I am not your employee. I am not your servant. I am not your slave.
If that makes me unsuitable for your network, you know exactly where you can stick the network.

WHat forum did you make the comments on? Or through what channel?

 

[Surf Cat]

You wanna share how lenders profit from AMC's keeping a bigger portion of the fee? That's a new line of illogic I haven't heard yet.

Oh, this is easy. It's not necessarily profit from AMC's keeping a larger portion of the appraiser fees..... the lenders no longer have to employ Chief appraisers and staff, pay their insurance, Etc to meet their federal law requirements.....

The borrower pays for the appraisal fee AND the AMC service fee. The lender gets off scot-free. Cha-Ching for the last 15+ years.

The only thing that may put a dent in this is the multiple borrower lawsuits happening right now with the bundling of fees being deceptive. But the wheels of Justice turn slowly.

 

[Fernando]

I have this one AMC which sends me emails and ask what is my fee and turnaround.
I can't remember getting an order from that AMC in a long time.
Is my fee too high? If so, why sending me these requests.
I'm going to send an email asking why I'm not getting any of their assignments. Communications. That's what I need.

I got an email back this morning.
She said she has to deal with 100 orders and thus no time to respond back to me. Now I know how they work.
That AMC works their employees so hard. Might as well use AI.

 

[J Grant]

You wanna share how lenders profit from AMC's keeping a bigger portion of the fee? That's a new line of illogic I haven't heard yet.

I did not say that lenders profit from the AMCs keeping a bigger portion of the fee when the AMC is independent. Please do not put words in my mouth.

Though it might be possible when the lender owns a captive order AMC -you are aware, of course, that a lender is allowed to own an AMC to process their own orders; said AMC runs under a different name.

When it is an independent AMC, the lender befits by sheding the cost of running a panel, and none of them volunteer to pay a cost for the AMC serivce, lol - and on top of that the lender simply looks the other way if an AMC leeps egrious splits from the appraisal fee ( that might change if the consumer lawsuits prevail) I will mention that a lenders did care about large chunks of the apprasial fee kep by the AMC and have the AMC run on an agrement to keep a fixed, lower amount from the appraisal fee.

I can not say whether certain lenders might profit or benefit from exchange of favors, stock ownership, or cushy AMC jobs for relatives or under-the-table kickbacks.

 

[Surf Cat]

I can not say whether certain lenders might profit or benefit from exchange of favors, stock ownership, or cushy AMC jobs for relatives or under-the-table kickbacks.

The AMC's and the lenders are tied at the hip. They both benefit from this symbiotic relationship. The appraisers are the sacrificial Lambs that feel they have nowhere to go but down the trough to the slaughter.

I completely understand the Op's anger. But he went about it the wrong way.

 

[TerryRohrer]

...teh fact that lenders either profited from or stayed silent aobut eh enormous erregous fees the AMCs kept out of the borrower paid apprasial fee as sell as their sleazy, low rent reverse markt styyle bidding an assignment out deserves outing .

I did not say that lenders profit from the AMCs keeping a bigger portion of the fee when the AMC is independent. Please do not put words in my mouth.

Huh? So much gibberish here, but the author should be able to understand their own, no?

 

[CGinMN]

I would go so far as to suggest that this example might not even come down to the criticism of the company or the evils of the AMC model, but is limited to the politically inflammatory verbiage itself.

That is exactly what it is. Appraisers post these screenshots and criticisms all the time. This one has more to it.

All it takes is one Well Fargo employee to see their company name on this, it gets escalated, WF goes to to their handful of AMCs and they all say we can't have this appraiser being sent our work, it presents a reputational risk, among other risks. The AMCs do their thing...Also doesn't help that its in a multi-ethnic suburb of Atlanta.

 

[J Grant]

Wells Fargo does not own GTCR — instead, GTCR is the private equity firm that acquired Wells Fargo’s Asset Management business. In November 2021, GTCR LLC and Reverence Capital Partners L.P. completed the purchase of Wells Fargo Asset Management (WFAM) from Wells Fargo & Co. for about $2.1 billion Npifund.

AI Wells Fargo does not own any equity interest in Clear Capital; it acted only as a financial advisor to GTCR during GTCR’s majority investment in Clear Capital.​

Detailed Explanation​

Ownership of Clear Capital​

• Clear Capital received its first outside investment when private‑equity firm GTCR acquired a majority stake. pehub.com
• Clear Capital’s CEO, Duane Andrews, retained substantial equity ownership. pehub.com
• No search results indicate any ownership stake held by Wells Fargo.

Wells Fargo’s Role​

• Wells Fargo served as a financial advisor to GTCR during the Clear Capital transaction. This is an advisory role, not an ownership position. pehub.com+1

My comment - thanks to AI, the incestuous relationships between the lenders who order thought firms like Clear Capital (which is a darling of the GSEs as well) can be exposed. A lot of money flowed uphill from the egregious fee portion the AMCs have kept from the appraisal fees all these years. I suppose these players will be working feverishly to scrub this kind of information from AI searches. ​

I hope the whole nest of them get exposed and pay and pay and pay in lawsuit after lawsuit for years to come. It may not compensate the immense fianncial and other harm caused to appraisers but it would be fun to watch.​

 

[alebrewer]

I did not say that lenders profit from the AMCs keeping a bigger portion of the fee when the AMC is independent. Please do not put words in my mouth.

How can I put words in your mouth? I'm in Texas and you're in Florida...

Here's what ya said (in case you've already forgotten):
"but teh fact that lenders either profited from or stayed silent aobut eh enormous erregous fees the AMCs kept out of the borrower paid apprasial fee as sell as their sleazy, low rent reverse markt styyle bidding an assignment out deserves outing .

So the way English works is thus: you combine a noun (in this case 'lenders') with a verb (in this case 'profited') and a prepositional phrase (in this case ' from AMC fees') to make a sentence. Not sure how you can say, "the fact that lenders either profited from or stayed silent about the enormous erregous (I'm assuming you were trying to spell egregious) fees the AMC's kept..." and then say that you didn't say, "the fact that lenders either profited from or stayed silent about the enormous erregous (I'm assuming you were trying to spell egregious) fees the AMC's kept...".

Am I missing something?

 

[J Grant]

How can I put words in your mouth? I'm in Texas and you're in Florida...

Here's what ya said (in case you've already forgotten):
"but teh fact that lenders either profited from or stayed silent aobut eh enormous erregous fees the AMCs kept out of the borrower paid apprasial fee as sell as their sleazy, low rent reverse markt styyle bidding an assignment out deserves outing .

So the way English works is thus: you combine a noun (in this case 'lenders') with a verb (in this case 'profited') and a prepositional phrase (in this case ' from AMC fees') to make a sentence. Not sure how you can say, "the fact that lenders either profited from or stayed silent about the enormous erregous (I'm assuming you were trying to spell egregious) fees the AMC's kept..." and then say that you didn't say, "the fact that lenders either profited from or stayed silent about the enormous erregous (I'm assuming you were trying to spell egregious) fees the AMC's kept...".

Am I missing something?

Yes, you are missing something. I said OR stayed silent about the enormous fees. I bolded it above. Big surprise, you only bolded the first part.

I have actual work to do and lack the time to unravel more rabbit hole logic twisting.