Revision Request

[Meandering]

Apparently you missed my earlier posting from the VA about qualified mortgages, which, are within the TILA.

Oh my.

.

 

[Deleted member 130081]

Basically TAF speak with formed tongue, do as requested, ignore the stone tablets...until we decide to come after you. Again, the ROV's purpose is to punish the appraiser for not hitting the number, nothing more. Otherwise, ROV's would be asked when you value the property above the contract or target amount. Show me such a ROV.

O they're out there all right to be sure - they dwell with the Snow Leopards.

 

[Deleted member 130081]

I have seen many ROvs that fall into that category. It is a common occurrence when one of the GSE underwriting tools flags a report for potential over valuation.

Care to offer a percentage or ratio between the ROVs you personally see from supposedly over-valued and supposedly under-valued? Because from what the field appraisers are saying, is that the percentage is so low, using the term never could be appropriate. I personally have never had an ROV saying my value was too high. I have had "many" - lol - when the contract value did not get met. I have had zero ROV's that were legitimate, and subsequently have never changed a value. I have charged extra and not charged extra and each time I charged extra for the additional analysis/service, lost the client. I have lost clients from too many under-contract appraisals too, even if they didn't submit a ROV.

This stuff is a problem Danny. You were an appraiser once. Somewhere deep down I am sure you know that all of this is not good.

 

[Meandering]

No, VA does not have an exemption from TILA. Thus, if one is going to argue that Tidewater (which is nothing more than an ROV done earlier in the process) complies with TILA, then one cannot make a logical argument that a ROV on a conventional mortgage loan violates TILA. Of course, logic is a foreign concept to some of the posters on the AF.

I guess it totally escapes your legal mind that the Tidewater initiative, per-dates Appraiser Independence in the TILA by about 7 years, and requires the submitter of additional data to grid the data.

Circular 26-03-11 12/22/2003

There are lies, damned lies and AMC advocates.

..

.

 

[Pittsburgh Pete]

Basically TAF speak with formed tongue, do as requested, ignore the stone tablets...until we decide to come after you. Again, the ROV's purpose is to punish the appraiser for not hitting the number, nothing more. Otherwise, ROV's would be asked when you value the property above the contract or target amount. Show me such a ROV.

ROV's are to "punish" the appraiser--what a cynical and ignorant comment. This idea that appraisers, like the Pope, are infallible (and the Pope's only infallible in matters of doctrine) is ludicrous. Numerous on this forum have questioned the results of appraisals on their own property. But I guess their addressing the issues they see in the appraisals of their own property is only meant to punish the appraiser!

And nice insult of Mr. Wiley. If he says they are there, I trust him. Have no reason not to.

Not surprised by those that "liked" this post of yours.

 

[residentialguy]

Tidewater does not eliminate ROV's since in reality Tidewater is an ROV, the only difference being that it is done earlier in the process (the appraiser does not invoke Tidewater unless he or she thinks that the appraised value will be lower than the contract price).

the only difference, huh?
Remember where I said that the lender needs to analyze the sales to see if they are better indicators of value and will change the outcome of the report, like the FNMA requires the lender to do for their CU sales? Well, here's the Tidewater process

Once the fee appraiser has notified the lender or POC, they will have 2 working days to provide additional information to the fee appraiser, in a format similar to the comparable sales grid on the URAR. Verification that the sale actually closed is also required. If pending sales contracts are submitted to support a time adjustment, they must be complete with all contract addendums attached. In addition, there should be a brief narrative attached that describes the similarities/differences between the pending sale and the subject property.

Hmmmmmmmm.....
Has anyone received an ROV like this??? Why is it that the lender has to do this with FNMA CU and with VA, but when an appraiser asks the lender to do this, they kick back with "No, that's impossible!"...when apparently it's not. Looks like my requirements of ROVs sending me their analysis (showing how the sales are better) is status quo with the big boys.

 

[J Grant]

ROV's are to "punish" the appraiser--what a cynical and ignorant comment. This idea that appraisers, like the Pope, are infallible (and the Pope's only infallible in matters of doctrine) is ludicrous. Numerous on this forum have questioned the results of appraisals on their own property. But I guess their addressing the issues they see in the appraisals of their own property is only meant to punish the appraiser!

And nice insult of Mr. Wiley. If he says they are there, I trust him. Have no reason not to.

Not surprised by those that "liked" this post of yours.

that is an inane comment- are you deliberately ignoring the difference between an ROV and a review? A review, or revision request from UW is triggered by a deficiency in the appraisal ( appraiser not being infallible ). And ROV is typically triggered by a vested party not getting a value they need to make a deal work.

I understand the purpose of an ROV, which is basically a client service to appease a customer (or agent of customer ) , but saying they are about an appraiser considering themselves infallible is ludicrous.

 

[TRESinc]

If I made an error and should have used it on the original report, I would certainly correct it. Obviously I could not charge for it, since they already paid for the best sales to be used. There would be no question as to whether or not the best sales for used.

so if they sent you a sale that was better than the ones used in the report, and you added it to the report and resubmitted, would you have a problem with them turning you into the state board for violating the certification you signed?

 

[DWiley]

that is an inane comment- are you deliberately ignoring the difference between an ROV and a review?

We make no distinction as to the source of alternate sales. Any request to consider alternative sales is treated as an ROV, regardless of the source of the sales. One bite of the apple is allowed - regardless of whether the source of the alternate sales is from a lender's reviewer/underwriter or from a document submitted by a borrower, agent, etc..

 

[Mr Rex]

I have more than once done a comparable search using MLS and inputted the same search criteria and had different comps appear or disappear for no rhyme or reason. I first noticed it when I pulled comps pre inspection then later did a fresh search after inspection using the same parameters and one or more of the comps that I had previously selected did not appear in the output. So sometimes there may be data/comps that are missed that are not the appraisers fault.