Let the borrower order it. The case for it.

[PropertyEconomics]

Marcia .. the point is not that I can explain a perception to the public that is there. We percipitate actually by our stance of intended users when we darn well know they will use the report to obtain a mortgage loan. I dont have to explain it to the court, heck Im going to agree with them .. the borrwer is a user and simply because I say they arnet doesnt make it so.
If it matters not regarding value .. then why do we care who orders a report? This is a false sense of security we like to give ourselves regarding our liability ... you sign your name you are liable. From that stand point .. I simply dont care ... I just want my competition to do the same work I do. After that .. its a free market and we either get clients by providing good service or we dont. The market doesnt owe me anything ... I am willing to do my part and earn my living.

 

[Karl]

Nothing is going to matter as long as we allow rules & laws NOT to be enforced & we sit aroud whining on here YET never daring to go and file complaints with those that MIGHT maker a difference. Lets get the general public involved & listen to some of thier stories.

 

[Karl]

PS here is a reply to the Real Estate Agent pressure Thread

Unfortunately they closed the thread as I was writing this.

My response to the following quote.

"I work as a consultant to the Chicago field office for the FBI's mortgage fraud division. I will be speaking to a group of local and national law enforcement officials on June 2nd at 2111 W Roosevelt Road Chicago, IL. I would invite you to attend, but you will probably be busy leveling unwarranted attacks at other well meaning posters".

End quote

Then you probably know about June 2008 & since you do this type work PLEASE enlighten me As to WHY you haven't reported this particular deal??

Never said you were a Trainee!! Since I do have a little bit of knowledge as to what is going on, I will continue to warn the masses from Trainee to those that have been in the business since beginning of time. That even though nothing has happened up to this point. I BELIEVE it's time for anyone that might through the various Fraud seminars that have been held in this part of the country for past two years. (Guess Chicago is behind the times) Appraiser's should have learned that some previous reports & things they discover now they MIGHT want to report before investigators come to you, or just have sealed indictments that you MIGHT not even know about YET!!

IF your in this field assisting you definitely KNOW that the attitude of FBI & IRS has made drastic changes in past year, about Mortgage Fraud. Now second in priority for the FBI to Terrorism. Yes I have attended 6 various seminars & going to Chicago is NOT going to teach me anything that we haven't already covered. Want some very good material??

Since you are doing this "consulting" work I'd think you more than anyone would want, the Transaction to be on the "Up and Up" & since your doing this kind of work wouldn't you TOO also advice Appraisers to go to them before they come to you??

Sorry IF I offended you, BUT you'll get use to it, you'll see that I have offended many. Cause I'll continue to offend those that complain. BUT then say they aren't going to do anything about it!!

This relates to the RE Pressure thread that Wayne closed cause I might have been a little bit to blunt with the TRUTH!!

 

[PropertyEconomics]

Nothing is going to matter as long as we allow rules & laws NOT to be enforced & we sit aroud whining on here YET never daring to go and file complaints with those that MIGHT maker a difference. Lets get the general public involved & listen to some of thier stories.

Karl .. if a review were done on every report the chances of those reports being turned in would be greatly enhanced. Enough complaints .. the board will take action .. atleast in my state anyway.

 

[SANDY]

Related issue is the policy where the underwriter cannot talk directly to the appraiser so we get these stupid stips from a phone monkey or the loan officer or processor, the very people in the chain that are most likely to exert pressure. Makes no sense to me that we aren't(normally) allowed to speak directly to the person asking for the addititional info. We are considering a new policy requiring that all requests for additional info must include the name and phone number of the person that generated the request. Tired of being forced to deal with people on the other end that probably have not even read the report let alone don't have the skills to ask relevant questions. Time to require that we have access to the folks generating these stupid requests for additional info.

 

[Marcia Langley]

Sandy,

It is an important policy to always get client requests in writing. If the contact person claims the request came from the underwriter, then the UW should be sending the written request.

This is always true but in cases where the request contradicts USPAP or other client requirements (like GSE or FHA guidelines) then holding out for a written request from the UW usually makes the request go away.

It is a fact that many MBs claim stips have come from "underwriting" when the report has never been seen by an underwriter. They try to fool the unwary appraiser into thinking the stip must be complied with even though it contradicts USPAP or the secondary guidelines.

 

[SANDY]

Marcia: We do require it in writing but most clients won't allow communication to the supposed person requesting the info--many times a one on one discussion with a supposed underwriter is helpful in determining what they really want to further support the appraisal. As you said, in reality many times it is not coming from someone that is knowledgable at all-it is coming from some checklist monkey that hasn't even read the report.

How do you deal with this situation-merely getting it in writing without the name and phone number of the person who generated it does not seem to be working.

 

[Karl]

Karl .. if a review were done on every report the chances of those reports being turned in would be greatly enhanced. Enough complaints .. the board will take action .. atleast in my state anyway.

Agree to a point, but!! TWO items need to be done in order for that to work. 1 The review has to be done properly!! the review & report has to be turned in. & should be explained as to WHY the report needed to be reviewd & details as to WHY, the review is right & Report is wrong & Here is where the problem come in,, some are turning things in that are basiclly C.S. & then the majority are NOT doing anytyhing at all. Many are getting the 150 fee & just saying I agree, cause they are afraid of repercussions.

 

[Marcia Langley]

Sandy,

The only way I know to deal with it is to do the best job I can sorting out the unreasoable VS. the reasonable and charging extra when they move the goal post. And sorting out the unethical VS. the ethical and refusing to comply with the unethical.

We all have to walk that tightrope between customer service and unreasonable goal post moving requests. Sometimes it's just a business decision and each case may have to be handled differently.

The ethical tightrope is one I refuse to walk. I'm too afraid of falling off on the wrong side. If I'm going to err, I'll err on the side of ethics. These decisions are usually easy for me.

The best protection and most sanity-saving stance is to be very well versed in the ethical distinctions. If one is not intimately familiar with the ethical issues, one cannot make confident, timely decisions regarding that.

 

[PropertyEconomics]

Agree to a point, but!! TWO items need to be done in order for that to work. 1 The review has to be done properly!! the review & report has to be turned in. & should be explained as to WHY the report needed to be reviewd & details as to WHY, the review is right & Report is wrong & Here is where the problem come in,, some are turning things in that are basiclly C.S. & then the majority are NOT doing anytyhing at all. Many are getting the 150 fee & just saying I agree, cause they are afraid of repercussions.

Karl:
We defeat the WHY question by making it mandatory for all reports. It doesnt have to do with quality or being done properly it has to do with this is policy. ALL reports are reviewed .. and by someone that is certfied, within the market area, with atleast five years experience. IF our goal is to improve the quality of the product and as a result the competence of the producer then some type of quality control is necessary.
I realize there is potential for a lender to find a yes man reviewer, however, not all will and those producing poor reports will find themselves before their board. I also think the reports will be written different if the original appraiser KNOWS the review process is mandatory.
How the states handle it is also up to us by lobbying strongly for competent people on the board and asking for funding to allow the process to work.
We have to start somewhere.

Sandy: I have found in nearly every instance, where I had an actual stip from the underwriter, when I ask, I have been allowed to speak directly with the underwriter in order to remove the middle man. If the stip is simple then I merely comply with the additional information and I dont charge extra for it. If the stip is beyond the scope of work or something that makes no sense to me I request the conversation.
If it is a loan officer calling me and telling me the UW said such and such, I always ask they send the stipulation over to me via fax or email. They either do or the condition goes away.