• 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.

Phil Crawford Podcast

I would suggest doing what you have already decided prior to posting
I changed it to contract price.
I should expect continual appraisal assignments from this lender.
 
Of course we want to see some for-real examples. Why wouldn't we?
.
Nobody has addressed it directly yet in the Data Cancer theme, but that chronic 1%-2% valuation creep has been juiced by the appraisers since forever. And those juiced cookies haven't just been limited to the worst of the worst of appraisers, either.

Most appraisers will already round up when appraising for a sale if the comps are within 1% to as much as 3% of the contract price. Rounding is a standard practice in appraising; and that rounding is usually to the higher number. Tie goes to the runner. I've done it before and my guess is that every appraiser here has done it even if only under limited circumstances. The "rounding up" might even occur more commonly among the reviewers than the appraisers. "I don't completely agree with this number but the difference isn't enough to justify a demand for revision". I've done that as a reviewer before, too.

AVMs can be manipulated by their users to do the same, or the lenders can simply choose to increase the actual LTV on the decision making side. The question that applies is whether or not the AVM users will do that more often or less often than the appraisers.
It's a chicken and egg thing - how can appraisers ( or any person ) provide real examples when a WAIVER is not disclosed on MLS or on a deed? You have suggested calling the RE Agent - as if someone searching comps or putting numbers in a program for statistics has the time to call 30 agents on all 30 sales to find the WAIVERS, assuming the agent even knows or gets back to them.

The assumption that numbers are rounded up if close to a SC price by appraisers is true sometimes but not other times, and normally is only be done when the SC price is within the adjusted value range of the comps

WRT WAIVERS, they might not be 1-2% valuation creep, it might be a 5-8% valuation jump depending - on- who can know, due to lack of disclosure? Which might not be true of all cases, or in some.

It is not about AVM users rounding up more or less often, it is tht the SC price itself, is the value of the property in a WAIVER - as long as it fell within the AVM from FAnie or Freddie - and no disclosure here either, , nobody outside of Fannie and Freddie saw the AVM - how wide was the range? Where was the top end? What comps were used? IDK< and you don't know.

In an appraisal , anyone can read it and challenge it and know the comps and agree or disagree whether it is credible or order a review or new appraisal or use or not use that appraiser again.

This is not the case with a WAIVER. They are untouchable. Nobody can review it, there is nothing to review. The value for the property was from a Sale contract or from a lender estimate and they are immune - they are not held liable for it, the lender is not liable for it , the lender has no buyback obligation ( relieved from reps and warranties )
 
My above post, I am not suggesting that WAIVERS always lead to a 5-8% valuaiotn jump each time out of the gate - but it can happen on any purchase waiver at any time, as long as it fell within the AVM range, which again, nobody outside the closed loop saw or understands. And each time a WAIVER sale is the high price --, that sale becomes a possible comp in an appraisal and almost sure thing comp in an AVM, which pulls raw data and does not qualify sales for rejection the way an appraiser might.
 
Appraisers in MN can check the eCRV. This is the document that gets filed by the title company and helps the assessor and dept of revenue track sales for taxation. It includes additional information about whether it was advertised prior to sale, buyer and seller were related, it was 1031 exchange, etc. There is a yes/no question for “buyer paid appraisal,” so if the MLS says conventional financing but no appraisal, it is a good indication there was a waiver.

You’re still gonna have to call the agent to verify.
 
OMG, it was not cool of him to mention G Hatch; he was just over the top, wrong. This is a bulletin board- open to all -I can't stand some of the people here, am neutral about others, and greatly admire others here. ( and sometimes feel the conflicting 3 ways about one person!)

But what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. What debates we have on a BB stays on the BB. That is an unwritten code. Or I assumed it was.

Did you not get the memo that AF appeared in the PAVE report? As a reference :unsure:.
 
Did you not get the memo that AF appeared in the PAVE report? As a reference :unsure:.
What does a PAVE report have to do with WAIVERS?

Waivers are taking the bulk of business away, not PAVE.
 
Appraisers in MN can check the eCRV. This is the document that gets filed by the title company and helps the assessor and dept of revenue track sales for taxation. It includes additional information about whether it was advertised prior to sale, buyer and seller were related, it was 1031 exchange, etc. There is a yes/no question for “buyer paid appraisal,” so if the MLS says conventional financing but no appraisal, it is a good indication there was a waiver.

You’re still gonna have to call the agent to verify.
Another lets dump the burden on the appraiser to find out, ( which in many cases is not possible or very time-consuming) rather than demand Fannie and Freddie make the info readily available and especially so to the MLS.

Does the eCRV have the info readily online? Where do you access the document filed by the title company?

Checking each sale on it would be far more time-consuming than if it showed up on MS they way Cash, VA, FHA conventional do,

A Waiver is part of conventional financing, so it would need its own disclosure.
 
You need to chill. I am talking about avenues for an appraiser to locate potential waiver sales for study, rather than just assuming data cancer exists without proof. I’m not saying it should be our responsibility to do so for every sale we analyze in an appraisal, that’s your argument. I am saying we could benefit from putting for some analysis together which draws a conclusion in “data cancer.” That’s step 1.

The GSEs are not going to give you this information. Most MLS systems won’t make it a required field either, because it could expose their members to liability. We are already hearing stories of agents being liable for advising against getting appraisals in purchase transactions, so I doubt MLS wants to give attorneys this info.
 
What does a PAVE report have to do with WAIVERS?

Waivers are taking the bulk of business away, not PAVE.

Because of your comment that posts on the forum should stay in the forum as if there is a code or something. I thought it was funny and why I mentioned the PAVE reference. Haven't visited for a while but heard about the skuttle-butt and came for the entertainment. It did not disappoint. Also - how do you know DW didn't call Phil about the #datacancer? I assumed it's why Danny made an appearance in the first place. That's when we know it's really bad. Reminded me of Fannie and Freddie telling America how wonderful they were before the GFC. Hopefully not but similar tone - as in danger zone messaging.
 
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