Regulator wins TAF CEO position

[djd09]

I don't remember how that worked out, I never worked for them. Durbin is at Voxtur now so I assume Clarocity went bust owing appraisers an untold amount of money.

voxtur is a member of the iac...it is difficult to sift through that situation

 

[chad hampton]

The appraisers only loyalty should be to the public trust. If USPAP says anything other than that, it should be tossed and re-written.

 

[George Hatch]

The foundational principles don't resonate with you so I'll approach the issue instead from a different aspect which you might have the intellect to understand - the money.

If your users don't believe you then they won't use you. If your users can't use your work to contribute to their decision making then they won't use you. Your work is entirely unmarketable except to the extent your users trust you as an individual and trust that particular appraisal based on it's own merits. You could have the perfect value conclusion but if your users don't understand it or suspect your professional honesty and integrity then they can't use you. Leastwise, not any legitimate user.

Why have appraisers lost business to AVMs and BPOs and 3rd party data collectors and such? Because the users don't think the advantage in reliability between what appraisers do vs what the AVMS do is sufficient to justify the additional cost and hassle of dealing with appraisers. We can call those users all the names we want but that doesn't alter the reality of who makes the decisions as to what types of valuations they think are sufficient to their usage. That "who" isn't the appraisers and it isn't the govt and it isn't the general public; it's the users of our services; whether they're lenders or accountants or attys or a govt agency or a property owner. As in, not just the banksters.

So as much as you hate your clients and users, you still need them to continue to choose you over your competing appraisers. You still need them to continue to choose appraisals over their other alternatives, even if at the lesser percentage in their transactions. It's far more difficult for an appraiser to replace a good client than it is for that client to replace an appraiser. That's why trying to fight them at every turn is counterproductive to your personal interests. Counterproductive to your career. Counterproductive to your money. You're not allowed to lie for them, but you're also not allowed to blow off their legitimate interests insofar as the development and reporting of an appraisal assignment.

I would say that your fees are a completely separate issue except that if/when your users decide you're not helping them with their decision making then you won't be getting any more assignments - or the fees that go with those assignments.

 

[djd09]

The appraisers only loyalty should be to the public trust. If USPAP says anything other than that, it should be tossed and re-written.

independent, impartial, and objective are just punch lines for the unethical stakeholders...

 

[Surf Cat]

The appraisers only loyalty should be to the public trust. If USPAP says anything other than that, it should be tossed and re-written.

If that were the case, then borrowers would be able to hire appraisers on their own. Borrowers would hire appraisers based on their credentials, geographical competency, reviews on how they conduct their business.

The AMC model is the complete antithesis of the aforementioned. The AMC model defeats the purpose of an appraiser continuing and expanding their knowledge with education. With the exception of becoming a commercial licensed appraiser, there's no upside for a residential appraiser to keep expanding their knowledge under the AMC model.....you don't get paid for it.

Borrowers don't care about public Trust. They don't care if an Uber driver comes in and measures and photographs their house. The home buying public sees appraisers as an irritant, a speed bump in the home buying / borrowing process. Borrowers don't care if they're overextended or if their home is not worth the same as the remodeled one across the street. They want the loan and they want it now.

The lenders are doing just that. Going through the motions to make the loan. After all, it's not their money they're lending. Until AI, avms, collateral underwriter.... whatever becomes fully relevant, the lenders will continue to go through the motions with the appraisal model. Further tweaking, changing it, to make the process quicker and cheaper until that time comes where the spigot is shut off.

TAF appears to me is like any other government entity right now. Self-serving.

 

[George Hatch]

Have either of you idiots given any consideration at all as to how the public's trust in the appraisers originates? It doesn't originate from our assertions, it doesn't originate from Congress requiring the lenders to use appraisals, it doesn't originate from the PR the appraisal orgs use to advocate for their members, etc..

The public's trust in the appraisal profession starts at the appraiser-client and appraiser-user level. If you're good at what you do then the legitimate clients and users refer your name out to their peers. If you lie for an outlaw client then that outlaw client passes you on to THEIR peers. The same in reverse; if a legitimate user figures out you can't be trusted they share that with their peers, or if an outlaw user knows you won't cooperate with them they share that.

Same with these allegations of racism, which criticism these critics have been levying to basically all providers of all goods and services. Not just our profession. We are not being singled out for this harassment. These walking-wounded critics set out to find and exploit the exception to the prevailing trend and mischaracterize it as the norm, and before you know it the property owners you run into at an inspection fear you because they somehow think you have something to gain by hurting them.

Some of the criticism we've been getting as a group is avoidable - by us and by our own hand.

Now your habitual response will be to smear my personal integrity as an individual because you disagree with the substance of what I'm saying. I can't help that, because I'm not going to lie for you and tell you only what you want to hear; your validation means nothing to me. So instead, I'll ask you another question which I already know in advance that you are wholly incapable of responding to with anything of substance:

Since you brought it up, how do you think the appraisal profession even be able to put the general public's economic interests ahead of the legitimate interests of the users of appraisal services? What could you possibly do in any appraisal assignment that would serve the interests of the public more than the legitimate interests of your users?​

 

[djd09]

If that were the case, then borrowers would be able to hire appraisers on their own. Borrowers would hire appraisers based on their credentials, geographical competency, reviews on how they conduct their business.

The AMC model is the complete antithesis of the aforementioned. The AMC model defeats the purpose of an appraiser continuing and expanding their knowledge with education. With the exception of becoming a commercial licensed appraiser, there's no upside for a residential appraiser to keep expanding their knowledge under the AMC model.....you don't get paid for it.

Borrowers don't care about public Trust. They don't care if an Uber driver comes in and measures and photographs their house. The home buying public sees appraisers as an irritant, a speed bump in the home buying / borrowing process. Borrowers don't care if they're overextended or if their home is not worth the same as the remodeled one across the street. They want the loan and they want it now.

The lenders are doing just that. Going through the motions to make the loan. After all, it's not their money they're lending. Until AI, avms, collateral underwriter.... whatever becomes fully relevant, the lenders will continue to go through the motions with the appraisal model. Further tweaking, changing it, to make the process quicker and cheaper until that time comes where the spigot is shut off.

TAF appears to me is like any other government entity right now. Self-serving.

win the crowd...and you will win your freedom

 

[George Hatch]

If that were the case, then borrowers would be able to hire appraisers on their own. Borrowers would hire appraisers based on their credentials, geographical competency, reviews on how they conduct their business.

What borrower have you ever met who has the competency to measure any aspect of the appraiser's qualifications OR the specifics of the appraisal policies of the lender who is actually making the loan decision? How would you go about finding out what the user's requirements for that assignment are from any property owner? I mean if borrower satisfaction is going to be the only measure of an appraiser's ratings on YELP is that a good thing or a bad thing" Let us not lose sight of the point that the only party which is using the appraisal for the stated usage is the lender whose money is going out the door.

Not the loan originator and not the borrower and not the brokers who are involved. The feds cannot hold the lender's accountable for the appraisals they use without also giving them the responsibility and the discretion to pick and choose which appraisers they're accepting appraisals from. Even when doing so using an outside AMC.

Everyone hates the AMCs. That is what it is. But appraisers *should* understand that their real problem is that (some of) the lenders aren't doing what the appraisers want them to do. That makes the lenders their primary opponent.

The govt that they want to alter course and send appraisal engagement back to the loan brokers and property owners and real estate brokers is the same govt that could choose instead to impose on these lenders a minimum C&R wage for appraisers, and to also impose an all-1004 requirement for every loan transaction they conduct. Whether the lenders like it or not.

I mean, if you're going to advocate for the govt-driven authoritarian approach towards forcing the lenders to do what appraisers want them to do then there's no point is starting with half-measures.

 

[George Hatch]

win the crowd...and you will win your freedom

How?

 

[RCA]

You seem to be talking about your experiences - but not mentioning the specifics. So, you are off in thin air, thinking we know what you're talking about, but it is unclear what you are trying to say. You want us to guess and give you a confirmation to justify your assertions. I think not to add my intelligence to your lack of intelligence combined with morbid hatred.

You are right here, in front of our eyes, failing to communicate. You never reply to an email - so we have to, at the outset, guess what you are responding to --- you want to criticize people with flagrant accusations but protect yourself from forum rules by not relating what you say to posts. And often, therefore, it is not clear what you mean, -we have to guess. Your posts lack transparency, apparently to protect your rude behavior.

Again, you still don't understand the underlying principles that provide the foundation of appraisal standards well enough to be running your mouth on it.

The principles are pretty simple.

That's how you are conflat i n "the credibility of assignment results is always measured within the context of the intended use" with "predetermined outcomes," which we explicitly disavow and prohibit.

You would have to point me to what you are referring to. I certainly don't believe in predetermined outcomes. So, you are genuinely lying here. I don't think you would be intentionally lying. You are maybe just going nuts for some reason.

If you were taking the test, you would flunk it because the entirety appraisal standards is oriented to the prime directive as stated at the top of the PREAMBLE.

View attachment 86287

It's stated in black and white: that "meaningful" is judged by the user, not by you, not by me, not by any other individual appraiser, and sometimes not even by the clients when those clients are not among the intended users.

Actually, you are hallucinating. It doesn't say that "meaningful" is "judged by the user." That is another lie -- which I do believe hints at partial insanity. This kind of language in USPAP is what makes it a poor standard. Whether something is or isn't misleading or meaningful, can be a very subjective judgment. So, after many years of working with USPAP, you are forgiven for your growing insanity. You should consider going on vacation or changing occupations. You do have a problem this past week or two.

If the numerical outcome was ever the only thing that mattered in an appraisl then SR2 wouldn't exist.

OK, so what?

If it didn't matter if your users believed your SR1 development there then your conclusions could be stated on a 3x5 with your license number affixed;

You don't say.

as an expression of the appeal to authority (trust me because I'm the appraiser and you aren't).

I don't need to argue with this - for some reason.

You can have the perfect SR1 number,

Define "perfect SR1 number".

but if your users can't understand the SR2 communication

OK. Finally, we get to the point. Someone read my appraisal with calculations and couldn't figure it out. Must have been you I guess. - Oh so sorry. If said person was only a high school grad and never even had a year of algebra (apparently San Francisco has had a problem with this ), then they definitely would not understand my report. SO, you want to go down this road? Really?

OK. YOU are not qualified to review my appraisal reports if you can't understand MARS models - which are to be clear segmented linear and IMO not that difficult. If this is the case, you should have backed away from the assignment. If you did not, then you violated USPAP.

Again, this is one of many cases where USPAP winds up contradicting itself in so many ways. You can point to phrases in part of USPAP that support one opinion and other phrases that support another. And, it "appears" you are trying to say one part of USPAP is more important than another. USPAP is a standard

===> But it appears you were wading into waters you should not have waded into.

I can't tell you how many appraisals I've reviewed over the years that were fine on an SR1 basis but were kicked into review because the SR2 reporting didn't adequately sell the appraiser's solution to their readers.

Users often do not understand all the details of appraisal reports. The appraiser has to do what he can to sell the technology. If an appraiser like me uses advanced math - and believe me I am not the only one who does this, a good strategy is to leave the dense mathematical calculations out of the report. But on the other hand, I do get requests from knowledgeable reviewers who want to know everything about the sometimes rather complex calculations. They want to see it - and apparently they can get the drift enought they feel comfortable with it.

I am guessing that what you are talking about is you taking on a review assignment you should never have in the first place, --- and believing you are the smartest review appraiser in the world. -->> --->>. You are definitely not. So, do i write my reports to the lowest standard or assume the lender will find a competent reviewer? IT IS THE LATTER OF COURSE.

Now, we can argue about this - and argue about it. Maybe TAF will pass a standard that says MARS Regression is not allowed. I doubt it. Maybe the GSEs will pass guidelines to that effect. I haven't seen it. Dan Wiley had one of my appraisals sent to him - he let me know, but didn't say much about it to me. Of course he has a degree in mathematics from a top tier university. The reviewer of said client called me and discussed the appraisal of a $5M home in Berkeley, and was apparently happy with the explanations ( e.g. I had to aggregate detailed adjustments that went into the grid and he wanted to see the calculations for the aggregates - so I just included the spreadsheet in the updated report.). -- The GSEs can do what they want. TAF can do what it wants. If they make decisions that limit the use of advanced techniques, so be it. But so far they have not. Otherwise, you may be in trouble for taking on assignments you lack competence for.

You, well, you don't know what you are getting yourself into. And I can't tell you. But you will find out eventually. Just wait.