• 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.

More On Free Comp Checks

How often do you actually get an appraisal order if they want a free comp check first and you won&#3

  • Never

    Votes: 207 30.8%
  • Maybe 1 out of 100 calls like that

    Votes: 107 15.9%
  • About 1 out of 50 calls like that

    Votes: 94 14.0%
  • About 1 out of 10 calls like that

    Votes: 117 17.4%
  • About 1 out of 5 calls like that

    Votes: 94 14.0%
  • I ALWAYS talk them into the order without giving a value first

    Votes: 53 7.9%

  • Total voters
    671
Status
Not open for further replies.
"All relative to purpose and scope." Skillfully crafted Legalese for "Give the Client whatever they ask for dammit - as long as you "give em the $$$$$$$$$ number they reallllllly don't care!"

Thats' obviously worked exceedingly well. Ask Bear Stearns.

"Special interests will pick at your bones"

As will the exercise of Common Sense........eventually.:icon_mrgreen:
 
"All relative to purpose and scope." Skillfully crafted Legalese for "Give the Client whatever they ask for dammit - as long as you "give em the $$$$$$$$$ number they reallllllly don't care!"

Thats' obviously worked exceedingly well. Ask Bear Stearns.

"Special interests will pick at your bones"

As will the exercise of Common Sense........eventually.:icon_mrgreen:


And here I thought Bear Stearns ran into a liquidity trap, like every other non-GSE, since only the GSE's had the implicit wink of government bail out and open doors to the Fed for borrowing $$.

All this time it was because some auditor said they didn't order URAR's from the get go on their files.:shrug: :new_smile-l:
 
And here I thought Bear Stearns ran into a liquidity trap, like every other non-GSE, since only the GSE's had the implicit wink of government bail out and open doors to the Fed for borrowing $$.

All this time it was because some auditor said they didn't order URAR's from the get go on their files.:shrug: :new_smile-l:


H.R. 3915

RESOLUTION HAS BEEN APPROVED IN THE HOUSE & REFERRED TO THE JOINT HOUSE/SENATE COMMITTEE............IN NOVEMBER.......WHERE IT "sits".......awaiting the Senates' version......

hopefully this CLAUSE will remain intact:

Section 129 of the Truth in Lending Act (
15 U.S.C. 1639) is amended by inserting after subsection(u) (as added by section 303(f)) the following new subsection: (v) Property Appraisal Requirements


(1) IN GENERAL
A creditor may not extend credit in the form of a mortgage referred to in section 103(aa) to any consumer

without first obtaining a written appraisal of the property

to be mortgaged prepared in accordance with the requirements of this subsection.

(2) APPRAISAL REQUIREMENTS

(A) PHYSICAL PROPERTY VISIT

An appraisal of property to be secured by a mortgage referred to in section 103(aa) does not meet the requirement of this subsection unless

it is performed by a qualified appraiser who conducts a physical property visit of the interior of the mortgaged property.:clapping:


The lightbulb finally lit, may it BURN BRIGHTLY.:icon_idea:


OPINION: "It is what it is ONLY when you know what it REALLY is"
 
OPINION: "It is what it is ONLY when you know what it REALLY is"
I guess that means you won't rest until there is a law that kicks down the doors of the comp owners so you can "know what it really is" as well?

Actually, that isn't intrusive enough. I believe the ideal legislation/procedure in a centrally planned economy would require a filming by a government official of the interior and exterior condition of the comps at the moment of the meeting of the minds of buyer and seller.

Or, would it matter if their minds met in such a future???:unsure:

Probably not. Some centralized authority will dictate the value from a cost index or whatever. :rof:
 
Some centralized authority will dictate the value from a cost index or whatever.


That's exactly what they've been doing...... obviously with excellent results.:new_smile-l:
 
Mike,

That still does not affect anything. IF there are two assignments, two scopes of work, two intended uses, the first order, a desktop, does not have an intended use of financing. Its intended use would be more along the lines of "developing a level confidence in the owner's stated opinion of value, which was not provided to the appraiser, prior to beginning a mortgage financing transaction."
 
Bill - disclaim it away .........every borrower who gets the following call ............knows better........ and so does the CALLER.......


"Hey Mr. Jones..........its' Tom from TAKE-UR-MONEY-RUN Mortgage............CONGRATULATIONS.......I just got a preliminary value from the appraiser I own - you WILL get yur loan..........NO PROBLEMO!!!!!."


Same caller, same borrower, same subject, same purpose, same intended use of BOTH value opinions...........

DO THE SAME DEAL.$$$$

There is only ONE reason the L.O. / M.B. contacts an Appraiser to obtain a "ballpark", "best guess", "doable number" ................ semantic exercises with additional B.S. do NOT obscure the "END GAME".


FOR RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE LENDING -

WHETHER FEE OR FREE IS NOT THE ISSUE - "PRELIMINARY" IS ...

WHETHER A DESKTOP OR A DRIVE-BY ........FIRST...... THEN A SECOND "FULL APPRAISAL ASSIGNMENT" EXTORTION AND COERCION ARE.......WHAT THEY ARE............



"PHASED ASSIGNMENT - MY *** - "GIMME THE DAMN NUMBER OR I'LL FIND SOMEONE WHO WILL".


END OF STORY.
 
Last edited:
Mike,

Again, I think that in the majority of the cases you might be right with the real intent of the unethical MB's and unethical appraiser's in this business. But can you seriously not stop and think about it for a second and recognize that pushing for this "full interior inspections only" will limit what appraisers can do for their clients? To the point that they will find alternative valuation products?

See, we all know what the real issue is. Unethical people doing unethical things. IF its illegal now what in the world makes you think that adding one more law to the books will solve the problem? You are really just creating more problems. If you want to stop the problem, go to the source, the unethical people. Another regulation will solve nothing.

You get your law passed and I will guarantee in 2 years, we will be right back here, and you will be complaining about people doing "illegal comp checks" before they go out and "do a real appraisal". It is so frustrating trying to make people understand that bad people are bad people. They will continue to be bad no matter what laws or rules you pass. You want to get rid of them, do it from the enforcement side, through the MFWL, or some other means, but quit taking tools out of appraiser's hands that are good, legitimate valuation products that some clients need and are willing to pay for.

Desktops, driveby's, on site interior inspections, all have their place as tools that can be used by appraisers. You are unwilling to separate your emotional attachment to this issue to be able to discuss it with any logical clarity. No matter what the scenario is that is presented, you immediately jump to: "Well we all know that's not what they really want, what they really want is a guaranteed number." Guess what Mike, you are wrong. That is not what they all want. Maybe in your little corner of this planet, but not in all of it. Please do not attempt to make rules for all of us based on your experience, because your experience is just yours. If you do not want to do anything but interior type work, have at it. But if one of my clients calls me, and the scope of work and intended use fits a desktop or drive-by, I want to be able to offer my client that service. You don't have to agree with it Mike, just don't keep everyone else from doing it. If you want to go save the world, go for it. But please, go after the bad guys, leave the rest of us alone.
 
Bill - focus. This thread is about Comp Checks with Contingent "Second/full" assignments for the exact same Intended Use - to float the exact same residential mortgage loan. Period. Solicitation to commit fraud, Extortion, and Collusion are Solication, Extortions, and Collusion regardless of the semantic dance.




" but quit taking tools out of appraiser's hands that are good, legitimate valuation products that some clients need and are willing to pay for."

Stand alone orders based on distinctly different SOW AND DIFFERENT INTENDED USES is NOT the issue of this thread. Performing "preliminary" ANYTHING - whether free or free - to obtain "full appraisal orders" which ONLY materialize after one grabs her/her ankles...........IS.



p.s. the next time you buy a house or a car feel free not to get a home inspection or have the guts checked by a reputable auto mechanic. I pass. You are entitled to your opinion as am I. Give a number without checking the "guts" - without truly being the "eyes and ears" of my client - pass. I gave them my Word and I signed my Name. Do that without getting in - not in this life. Knock your socks off if you do.
 
Last edited:
Mike -

your telling me to focus? relax, take a few deep breaths, then answer these to questions:

1. MB calls, "Mike, I will pay you $250 if you will do a desktop appraisal on 111 E Mulberry Street. I dont want to get into this loan to deep until I know if the borrower's opinion of value is way off."

What is the intended use of the appraisal?

2. A week later - "Hi Mike, seems her wasnt terribly far off and we would like to proceed with a regular appraisal, here is the guys number, give him a call. We are going to do a refinance for him"

What is the intended use of the appraisal?



Again, I respect that you want to help clean up the profession. So do I. But cleaning it up and killing it are two different things Mike. We agree that there are bad people who do the value shopping thing. Go after them, not the products. You are solving nothing with that above proposed law. People who break the current laws will break that one. Just because you would not do an appraisal without walking through the property does not mean that every appraiser in the country should be like Mike. You obviously do not do commercial work. Again, I will mention the apartment complex example. You really think you will get into 1000 units? Wont happen.

Your argument reminds me of the gun control argument. Since criminals use guns, lets take all the guns away. Think the criminals will give theirs up too?



ps - In the 20 or so properties I have bought, I have had 1 home inspection done. In the 30 or so vehicles I have owned, I have never had a mechanic check the vehicle out.
 
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