• Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.

McKissock dumps PAREA

Status
Not open for further replies.
In the current state of the Residential appraisal business

low fee's
low volume
higher annualized cost
reduced margin
emphasis on report delivery speed
elimination of appraisal reports due to waivers, value acceptance

Even Non-Lender work cost Time and money to get it. i.e There is an added cost of advertising

Plus many people just look at Zillow!

Who would want to invest that much time and money as a trainee, when you could spend far less annually at a full time job with benefits?

Think about it a moment. Junior college is dirt cheap. There are many careers/positions out their for two year graduates with benefits. Which is less time than it takes to get a residential license.
 
Years ago before licensing your credentials meant something to the Banks. You earned your way there only if they had a need. With Lenders they now can make loans Literally anywhere and depended on the the AMC Leeches. Their origination fee is a percentage. Cool! Inflation proof. There was a time lenders considered bundling. That never caught on. I think it was because some appraisal assignments were way more complex and no one would do them at cheap charlie prices.

So is there still a need for res. Appraisers? Yes! Just not so much anymore for conforming lenders. Under the current res License process, they are not trained enough to take on many non-lender assignments. i,e divorce, estate, Hard Money lenders are the exception, but those assignments are high risk for a new appraiser. Good Money, but much higher expectations. They don't play around.
 
djd09 said:
and 10% for the big guy... :rof: :rof: :rof:
Click to expand...

Let me tell you, the schills on the Forum are reeling! It's been a terrible week for them. Your thread about time adjustments (which I have been saying for years) and now PAREA is dead before it even started. Oh well, I'm sure they will continue to stick their head in the sand and continue their now-debunked narrative.
 
John Hassler said:
It isn’t surprising that McKissock tabled PAREA. AI seems to have had a head start on them and will likely suck up what little demand there is before McK could launch.

I am somewhat relieved McK halted implementation of PAREA. The AQB set up a structurally unsound system for PAREA. Once the AQB approves a Vendor’s PAREA program there is virtually no oversight by the AQB except to respond to complaints or (optional) audits. By then a rogue Vendor could have done considerable damage (think how an AMC could abuse this to staff an army of newbies).

As it stands now, the Vendor hires the Mentor. The qualifications to be a Mentor are the same as those of a Supervisor. In other words, a very low standard. The AQB should have modeled Mentor qualifications like those to be an USPAP Instructor. Besides standardization of the training done by the AQB, this would better align the interests of the Mentor with the AQB rather than with the needs (greed) of the Vendor.
Click to expand...
Mentors are not a requirement in PAREA.
 
No need to worry though it is always party time at 15th St. They must be so proud of their latest project. :rof:


1705086250910.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • 1705086250950.jpeg
    1705086250950.jpeg
    75.4 KB · Views: 7
The primary reason I oppose the use of PAREA for experience requirements is because it is educational in nature, not experiential. A series of highly contrived and curated appraisal problems is really just an extension of the QE training.

There is no IRL client or user, no actual usage, there is no IRL interaction with borrowers, brokers, and there STILL is no training on how to physically inspect a property or rate its attributes or make comparisons with other properties. The only feedback loop is the review of the work by another appraiser, who by definition isn't a user or a layperson, and who doesn't have a role which conflicts with the appraiser's role and therefore won't pose any challenges to that role.

In my view, the IRL experience requirements don't just serve the purpose of exposing noobs to the COMPETENCY oriented requirements of acting as an appraiser, they also expose the noobs to the ETHICS oriented requirements and experiences and feedback loops. Just to mention a couple examples, we learn how to tell people "no" by telling people "no", if/when necessary. We learn to deal with ROVs and opposing input by doing so, not by referring readers back to the original analysis.

If the AQB added even a 200-hour PAREA element to the qualifying education criteria that would be a big improvement in the training of new appraisers, probably enough to justify lowering the experience requirements. But that's what PAREA actually does for a student's progression - training, not showing them how to act in the role of an appraiser with our clients, users and the public.

Just as an illustration, McKissock's role in offering a PAREA is as an educational entity, whereas BofA would be using it in conjunction with their supervision in real life assignments.

Besides all that, the most common reasons for a bad appraisal are NOT because the appraiser doesn't know how to perform properly (lacks the technical competency) , but because for whatever reason they chose not to perform to their competency (which amounts to an ethical violation). That further supports why playing appraiser on a Playstation console cannot be considered a substitute for actually walking the walk and dealing with these ethical challenges over an extended period of time.

IMO.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Find a Real Estate Appraiser - Enter Zip Code

Copyright © 2000-, AppraisersForum.com, All Rights Reserved
AppraisersForum.com is proudly hosted by the folks at AppraiserSites.com
Back
Top