More AMC and PDC Bull

[Non Sequitur]

Let me know what you find out about that.

Exactly. Appraisers didn't get behind the Louisiana board when it stood up for appraisers, and they won't get behind a random law firm chasing $$. If we had an org like REVAA with its money and willingness to fight we might have a chance, but we don't. It's that simple.

 

[djd09]

Again.... the answer isn't in additional government regulation. The answer is in appraiser being willing to do what you did... and what I did and still do. Don't accept assignments with low fees. Again... It is none of my business how much the AMC makes nor how much the Lender makes on a transaction. My business is how much is my time and expertise worth. Do you really think that there should be a standard appraisal fee? I reckon my work, and maybe yours, is better than the work of a newly certified appraiser. I have more tools in my tool bag.

And yes, I do QC review work for an AMC. They meet my pay demands. That isn't the only thing I do or have done. Including, but not limited to, appraising many types of properties, all sorts of reviews (my favorites are forensic reviews), teaching QE, supervising and mentoring new appraisers, and pretty much everything else that many appraisers do. The big difference is that I paid my dues through long hours, difficult assignments, difficult Clients and property owners, etc, etc.... and now, I can choose what I do and don't do and how much I'll need to be paid for it.

IMO, it is you who has been condescending. You know.. or did know.. little about my appraisal career... yet you dismiss me. You don't simply disagree and state your case. It's fine if you disagree. That is your right. I am still going to say that I think you are wrong, when I do.

Maybe the big difference is I don't think that AMCs are inherently evil in the way you seem to. They are legal companies trying to earn a profit. I have the choice, as do all appraisers, of which ones to do business with... if any.

you could of been a spokesperson for coester...

 

[Carnivore]

In North Carolina, AMC (Appraisal Management Company) fee splits are regulated to protect appraisers. AMCs must pay “customary and reasonable” fees and can’t keep an excessive portion of the appraisal fee. NC also requires transparency—AMCs must disclose the total fee, the amount paid to the appraiser, and the amount they retain. They must pay appraisers within 30 days unless a different agreement is in writing. While the split itself isn’t taxed, each party is taxed on the portion they keep: the AMC’s share is business income, and the appraiser’s share is their taxable income.

 

[Carnivore]

---

​

Yes, AMCs absolutely risk having to pay for past violations. In many states, lawsuits and regulatory actions have forced AMCs to repay underpaid fees, refund money to appraisers, or compensate for work that was improperly discounted. On top of that, states can impose civil penalties, fines, license suspensions, or even revoke an AMC’s registration if the violations were serious or repeated. In other words, AMCs don’t just face a slap on the wrist — they can be forced to pay back money they should have paid appraisers in the first place and face additional penalties for breaking the law.

---

 

[chad hampton]

Exactly. Appraisers didn't get behind the Louisiana board when it stood up for appraisers, and they won't get behind a random law firm chasing $$. If we had an org like REVAA with its money and willingness to fight we might have a chance, but we don't. It's that simple.

1000 %. It really is that simple.

 

[Zoe]

If fees were separated on truth in lending disclosures, it would be wide open to all lenders and regulators and borrowers on good faith estimates. It would create intense competition between appraisal management companies to get a lender's business.

In marketing when market structure gets off balance the competition becomes known as ruinous competition. How low could an AMC go to under bid another AMC to get the lender's business?

How low can they go to out compete other AMCs on good faith estimates? AMC "A" says $150. AMC "B" says $50 on good faith estimate to borrower.

AMC "C" says $25. The list goes on.

 

[Zoe]

Separation of fees on good faith estimate estimate would almost force lenders to pay AMC directly. The AMC fee would probably be a non negotiable fee that could NOT be changed from good faith estimate to borrower. Zero tolerance change from good faith estimate. If good faith estimate said $50, then there would be zero tolerance on what AMC is paid. It would be $50.

 

[Surf Cat]

Separation of fees on good faith estimate estimate would almost force lenders to pay AMC directly. The AMC fee would probably be a non negotiable fee that could NOT be changed from good faith estimate to borrower. Zero tolerance change from good faith estimate. If good faith estimate said $50, then there would be zero tolerance on what AMC is paid. It would be $50.

I believe the borrowers would pick up on this really quickly.... and discover through their favorite AI search engine that it is the lender's responsibility as they are required by Federal law, to oversee the appraisal process....and revolt. Right now, the borrowers don't know any better.

Problem is, the AMC's have been used to grifting approximately $300 from the appraisal fee.... hundreds of AMC's would drop like flies and not be able to survive on a $50 to $60 processing fee for the appraisal..... the lenders would have to either Pony up, or go back to the days of yore and have their own appraisal department.

Bottom line, the appraisal fee should have never been touched, and utilized as compensation for the lender's requirements.

Lots of lobbying $$ in play to keep things the way they are and maintain their position though. In this regard, the real estate appraiser doesn't stand a chance.

 

[Zoe]

I believe the borrowers would pick up on this really quickly.... and discover through their favorite AI search engine that it is the lender's responsibility as they are required by Federal law, to oversee the appraisal process....and revolt. Right now, the borrowers don't know any better.

Problem is, the AMC's have been used to grifting approximately $300 from the appraisal fee.... hundreds of AMC's would drop like flies and not be able to survive on a $50 to $60 processing fee for the appraisal..... the lenders would have to either Pony up, or go back to the days of yore and have their own appraisal department.

Bottom line, the appraisal fee should have never been touched, and utilized as compensation for the lender's requirements.

Lots of lobbying $$ in play to keep things the way they are and maintain their position though. In this regard, the real estate appraiser doesn't stand a chance.

The original bill was written for fees to be separated on truth in lending disclosures. NAIFA and later known as IFA almost went broke fighting for separation of fees on truth in lending disclosures. Appraisal Institute did not fight for separation of fees like NAIFA and IFA did.

I can't think of the woman's name that was with Appraisal Institute and was fighting for single family residential appraisers and she got fired.

 

[AppraisingLA123]

I received a call from an AMC representative regarding participation in a PDC + appraisal product. During the talk, I asked how appraisers are compensated if they review the PDC data and identify errors or determine the data is not credible enough to proceed. I was told that there is no compensation for reviewing the PDC data unless the assignment is upgraded to a full appraisal and requires a site visit. So we will be used as free labor to review their PDC inspectors work. What a joke of a profession this has become.

Yes its a joke and becoming more of a joke. I hate working for AMCs, every report i submit, if the submission goes through that is, now you can't even submit reports without the system pointing out 50 errors, then you get months of revisions are common.