Newbies Please Read This

[Kate]

Jeremy,

If you didn't understand Jereme's first responce, maybe you will understand this little legal term.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

You may be honest. But think about what the senerio means. If I don't hit the value I don't get paid. Can you explain that to a Court?

 

[Rich Hahn]

I think Tina is back..

Rich

 

[DB]

Did she finally get kicked?

Merry Christmas brother Rich! Long time no hear from!

 

[Kate]

No no no you two are talking about Shirley. Yup Shirley could just be Jeremy.

No Tina is hanging in watercoolerville. Talking homocidal and crazy nonsence junk, hoping someone will respond to her or it.

 

[DB]

Kat .... my Dodge driving sister .... I have about as much use for one of them as I do the other ...... :lol:

 

[Jeremy Noland]

Originally posted by George Hatch@Dec 12 2003, 03:12 PM


For one thing, it establishes a very uneven appraiser/client relationship, wherein the client is in complete control and the appraiser is constantly reacting to the clients' demands. This is how appraisers end up feeling like a dog on a short leash, contantly getting yanked around and being subjected to demands to perform "stupid appraiser tricks".

Thank you for your responses. I wanted some feedback and you all came through. I am not going to do business this way, but I do think it is a good 'business' idea. Maybe not legal, but if this appraiser wants to keep doing it, it is his decision.

But George, I think this gentleman who is doing business this way has the mortgage lenders/brokers by the leash. After all, if they have a problem with the value he is done with that particular appraisal. He doesn't have to justify his findings. He just moves on to the next one. The mortgage people know this and do not demand anything more from him. At least that is my interpretation. This person that does this is actually the first person I spoke with about becoming my supervisor, but he is a one man shop and did not want to have a trainee.

And I would never snitch on anyone else unless it is hurting others. I feel it is his business how he charges his fees and it doesn't hurt me directly. Now I know you will say it hurts the industry, but I disagree. If it is a problem he will eventually get caught, making one less person to compete with.

But again, if this appraiser is not pressured with getting a predetermined value I see nothing wrong or illegal with it. He might come up with a value and find out later that he did not hit it. As I read it that is not a violation of USPAP.

And thanks Tim, I think I will read the things in small print. Are those things important?

And Katherine, Shirley you can't be serious. :lol: I hope you have made friends with your contacts in this business. Would that be a conflict of interest?

Off to finish the appraisal I did today. Hope I hit the value or I am not charging for it. :twisted:

PS. I did call my state appraisal board but they were gone for the day. I did call other appraiser offices and asked about if they ever did free appraisals. Most laughed and said only for family. Uh-oh...I just might call the appraisal board on them.

"Those that think inside the box will always wonder why there is no money inside their wallet." -Cartman from South Park

 

[Kate]

Originally posted by Jeremy Noland@Dec 13 2003, 12:57 AM

And Katherine, Shirley you can't be serious. :lol: I hope you have made friends with your contacts in this business. Would that be a conflict of interest?

Yes I was serious actually.

I believe it is a conflict of interest because you are only getting a fee IF you hit a value. Like I said you may be an honest chap. But that equation is a desaster in the making. Shirley or Skippy the appraiser may look at that as " I better find a way to bring up value, get better comps, fudge GLA" what ever you have to do to bring up value, otherwise you will not get paid for all the hours you just put in.

I'm not a lawyer and maybe "conflict of interest" is the wrong term but it sound appropriate to me.

 

[Stone]

Jeremy - Your posts tell me that you still consider those who reject this to be people who are not good businessmen and only think "inside the box." Thinking outside the box does not include fraud, and if you are only getting paid for appraisals that hit a number, you are commiting fraud (I know that you aren't doing this, I speak in general). There is nothing more to it. This is so explicitly against everything we are supposed to do, that it was hard to believe you thought this was a legitimate business plan when you first posted. And, BTW, "snitching" on those who you know are praciticing like this is not only something you should do, but it is something you should do first thing Monday morning. If appraisers are performing appraisals with this kind of fee structure, then no way can their reports be trusted, no matter what they feel they are doing.

Also, no way that lenders who use this kind of service can be trusted. If they are willing to shop for an appraisal that hits the number, then they are commiting fraud against those who are buying their loans. The companies buying the loans believe they are buying a mortgage with an unbiased appraisal, and if the client shops to find an appraisal that fits the desired number, they are not getting what they are paying for.

And if you don't think that this hurts the industry, you are fooling yourself. This is why people/companies think they can pressure appraisers to hit numbers. This is why more and more people think that appraisers exist to hit their number. This is why the public thinks less and less of this profession.

So stop deluding yourself that this person is just thinking outside the box. He is thinking outside the box in the same way that Arthur Anderson thought outside the box in their Enron accounting. This crap costs everyone money, and if you actually know for a fact that it is going on, you should turn this person in.

This is not like discussing what type of adjustments to make, or whether you can use time adjustments. This is just wrong.

 

[CANative]

"Jeremy" is obviously a poser. Not even the rawest of newbies would espouse such silly stuff.

Tim:

I took the time in 1991, has it changed since then?

6/93?

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

Great reply Michael!!!