July 2008 ASC Q&a- Wink Wink Comp Comp

[Mike Phillips]

http://appraisersforum.com/showthread.php?t=142307 Is there any doubt why Florida is in the front of Pack in Mortgage Fraud?

sure......it's okay if they DEMAND comp checks to guarantee an appraisal HITS THE BULLSEYE. FLORIDA SAYS SO.

MK -

That link is priceless. I will wear it out.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

Mike - hopefully. I've always been an Optimist.

 

[23Degrees]

Enforcement costs money, is slow and is reactive by definition. I still think that cutting the loan originators (who are many) out of the loop and keeping a closer watch over the direct lenders (who are few) will provide us with the most bang for our buck.

The only problem is that nobody really wants that. We value the "benefits" of the existing structure more than we value the level playing field.

I like the above summary.

While the Q&A was a bit convoluted in the final part – no need to require the disclosure of said “comp check” as to do so would imply a contingency which is not allowed in the first place, so if you have to disclose it then it should not have occurred – it did describe the rules as they currently stand.

One way to improve the Q&A IMO would be to add the sentence:

“And if the “comp check” request came from a loan originator of course any subsequent assignment was contingent. Duhhh!!”

But this would not be fair to all of the originators who do not assign the second assignment based on the contingency that the first one hit the bullseye – all three of them.

In the end I must concur that additional application of rules on appraisers in this matter would have no effect and I include the one I endorsed earlier in the thread that seemed to bring on a real Eureka moment to me for about 15 minutes before it was effectively cut down. Those who are breaking the rules now would find a way to break the ones suggested as well - easily. The rules are already there on this matter although to follow them properly often means you don’t get any work. Incredible situation but it is what it is.

George is certainly right - the most bang for the buck comes about by getting the originators out of the loop. Unfortunately this is being fought tooth and nail from all sides. I truly hope that a year from now we can no longer look forward to the weekly comp check thread but I'm not going to place any large bets that this will be the case.

 

[George Hatch]

Webbed I didn’t intend to slight the “pimps” by excluding them. They are the ones behind the scenes that make the present system function. Much like the colorfully attired street pimps, the comp check pimps are skilled at obfuscating USPAP and justifying their actions based on what they perceive as only giving the public what they desire. A had a college roommate who was a big fan of the old soap opera All My Children (AMC) Anyone remember Billy Clyde Tuggle the pimp with style? This forum is abundant with Billy Clydes who are blessed with USPAP panache instead of the wardrobe. Amazing how acronyms appear so often in this business.

I can't quite figure out whether you're aiming this one at the people on this forum who actually understand what the ASB is saying (i.e., have USPAP panache), or if you're aiming at the people who are not on this forum and who ignore USPAP and do whatever they feel like doing. They are, in fact, two very separate and opposing groups.

None of the idiots who are competing unfairly with you have "USPAP panache." And you have absolutely no moral advantage over any of us in this thread who are explaining to you what the ASB is saying. Just because you're incapable of supporting your "all comp checks are illegal" pitch doesn't mean we're taking advantage of word play or somehow victimizing you. We aren't the ones who are reading into the material more than it says, we're just pointing it out to you.

As an appraiser, I'm sure you are accustomed to telling people things that are true, but are nonetheless not what they want to hear. Well, now you know what it's like for some of us on this thread when we try to explain to you that USPAP allows you to offer appraisals for more than one type of use and in more than one format.

 

[Offshore]

Just because you're incapable of supporting your "all comp checks are illegal" pitch doesn't mean we're taking advantage of word play or somehow victimizing you. We aren't the ones who are reading into the material more than it says, we're just pointing it out to you.

Please point out where I made that statement. Even if I said it, legality and ethics are not one and the same. I’m unsure if the “we” and “you” references were meant to be condescending, not that it matters. As far as who my post was aimed at, maybe it was meant for the ones who profit from the current system and are reading the thread, but don’t wish to defend how they constantly “tweak” USPAP in a manner that even the big “Z” would envy. Individual appraisers have shown their disgust with comp check abuse for years. If some posts are emotional and hit a nerve, too bad, besides, this is a message board, not an argument before the Supreme Court. Please don't confuse me with the Puritans in here, I stoop so low that I even accept exterior assignments.

 

[Elliott]

Well I tried this one out today....Had a agressive MB call wanting comps
so I said well, here's one that's close, and here's another, and here's a
third. Told him the living area and sales price. Left it on his voice mail.

So am I okay? I didn't have to meet Standard 1 or 2, right?

So of course then I get a call back and now he wants to know what value
he'd be safe putting down on the application? Of course I'll call him and
say, can't do, then he'll be more pizzed off then if I told him from the
start I don't do comp checks. Thanks ASB for nothing.

 

[Fred]

So am I okay? I didn't have to meet Standard 1 or 2, right?

You probably did meet Std 1, and if you saved your assumed and researched relevant characteristics, the search(es) and the criteria, you probably have enough of a workfile to compile a summary report. So, I guess my answers are: yes and no.

 

[Lee Lansford]

Well I tried this one out today....Had a agressive MB call wanting comps
so I said well, here's one that's close, and here's another, and here's a
third. Told him the living area and sales price. Left it on his voice mail.

So am I okay? I didn't have to meet Standard 1 or 2, right?

So of course then I get a call back and now he wants to know what value
he'd be safe putting down on the application? Of course I'll call him and
say, can't do, then he'll be more pizzed off then if I told him from the
start I don't do comp checks. Thanks ASB for nothing.

Yep, you delivered an appraisal.

 

[Elliott]

Lee,
How so?

ASB Answer:
....
For example, an appraiser asked by a client to
provide “sales data of all homes located within a one mile radius” of a specific address
could comply with the client’s request without complying with STANDARDS 1 and 2,
because the appraiser would just be providing sales data pursuant to the client’s defined
parameters. In this example, the appraiser must be careful not to communicate any
opinions or conclusions regarding the data provided.

 

[Carnivore]

http://appraisersforum.com/showthread.php?p=1648244#post1648244

So appropriate for this to show up. I stated earlier that BOA and Wachovia have similar programs.

How many more Big Box Banks do the same thing.

Interesting that the Cheif appraisers have so little influence over what happens at there own bank.