Significant Appraisal Assistance (1004p)

[J Grant]

Well, I sometimes do use rhetorical questions in order to prompt you to think. See, I have no intention of attempting to tell you or any other appraiser what to think. I expect you to come to your own conclusions.

As for the "better or equal to" strawman the reason I didn't attempt to make that case should be obvious; it's because I don't believe that to be the case. Nor have I ever said otherwise. Nor have I implied otherwise.

If it is not better or even equal than it is worse, correct?

 

[J Grant]

These users are *choosing* to take the additional risks. As is their right, leastwise from an appraisal standards perspective. Of course, having made that choice they can't very well come back and complain about the errors that would have been avoidable had they engaged the appraisers to do the full monty.

We can't force these lenders to act more wisely.

We can't force them to act more wisely, but we could have better standards in place in USPAP that would prevent appraisals being complicit in it.

Allowing agents to inspect while being not named as contributing significant appraisal assistance comes to mind.

 

[George Hatch]

Why? If their own regulators aren't going to impose those additional controls then how does it devolve to the appraisal profession to dork our own minimums - which are applicable to all appraisal practice - just in order to combat the excesses that may occur when these users are given too much freedom by their regulators? Or perhaps more accurately, are not sufficiently restrained by either the market or their regulators?

Our profession exists to meet the demand in the market for these services. They ask the question and we respond to the question as asked, and within our role as the D3P. At whatever point we stop being responsive to these issues they will take their valuation business elsewhere. They buy, we sell; and as such we are in no position to dictate terms to them.

 

[George Hatch]

If it is not better or even equal than it is worse, correct?

Well yeah, from our perspective. I mean, if the lenders had to do what we said the base fees would be guaranteed at $1k, turn times would be no less than 30 days, and their appraisal policies would be limited to 1 page.

I guess it's too bad the lenders aren't employed by the appraisers or exist for the sole purpose of providing appraisers with a guaranteed annual income.

 

[J Grant]

Why? If their own regulators aren't going to impose those additional controls then how does it devolve to the appraisal profession to dork our own minimums - which are applicable to all appraisal practice - just in order to combat the excesses that may occur when these users are given too much freedom by their regulators? Or perhaps more accurately, are not sufficiently restrained by either the market or their regulators?

Our profession exists to meet the demand in the market for these services. They ask the question and we respond to the question as asked, and within our role as the D3P. At whatever point we stop being responsive to these issues they will take their valuation business elsewhere. They buy, we sell; and as such we are in no position to dictate terms to them.

That;s personal opinion on what a profession can or should be. A profession differs from a job in that in a ob, the boss says do X and you do X. In a profession, a client or customer says Do X but if X is not beneficial to the result then the processional says I need to do Y to get the proper result. And one hopes their own professional standards backs that up.

Prescribing pain pills is legal but is a physician acting responsibly if they prescribe them to fulfill a patient demand, if patient is developing a dependence? I may think my tax accountant should make risky deductions but he would advise against it. And so on.

If a profession is more than commerce than yes we should "dork our own minimums" when it is a fail in the market abuses those minimums allow.

 

[J Grant]

Well yeah, from our perspective. I mean, if the lenders had to do what we said the base fees would be guaranteed at $1k, turn times would be no less than 30 days, and their appraisal policies would be limited to 1 page.

I guess it's too bad the lenders aren't employed by the appraisers or exist for the sole purpose of providing appraisers with a guaranteed annual income.

Now you are jumping to a sarcastic extreme example- .since it is clear appraisers have not held out for 1k n or 30 day turn times, and in fact have twisted themselves into pretzels accommodating 48 hour turn times and lower fees to facilitate lender work why bring such an extreme,.

Straw charges about guaranteed income...nobody is asking for that either..

 

[bnmappraisal]

I just got an article published where I opined that appraisers performing these assignments will have to do *more* work at their desk in order to parallel some of the multi-tasking they're doing in a conventional 1004 assignment inspection. So I get it.

(my bold) I agree George and is why the "discount" I've given private clients for my desktop option (not physically inspecting/measuring a property) is not much less than my "full" inspection option (for lack of a better term).

I do explain to them that the reason is most of the work is "on the back end" at the office analyzing, typing, searching MLS, etc and that's why it's not a big "discount"

I'm still having to do the same verification, analysis, etc, and as you stated (and has been sometimes true in my case) it can take longer ("more work")

 

[George Hatch]

Oh, so there's been no talk about C&R issues?

That;s personal opinion on what a profession can or should be. A profession differs from a job in that in a ob, the boss says do X and you do X. In a profession, a client or customer says Do X but if X is not beneficial to the result then the processional says I need to do Y to get the proper result. And one hopes their own professional standards backs that up.

Prescribing pain pills is legal but is a physician acting responsibly if they prescribe them to fulfill a patient demand, if patient is developing a dependence? I may think my tax accountant should make risky deductions but he would advise against it. And so on.

If a profession is more than commerce than yes we should "dork our own minimums" when it is a fail in the market abuses those minimums allow.

So mount the appeal to the ASB to get them to change the definitions in USPAP in order to fight our own clients on behalf of their borrowers. Start with the PREAMBLE where we have asserted that it's the clients and intended users of these services who form the basis of the public trust in the appraisal profession and work your way down from there.

'Cause that's how deep into it you're going to need to go in order to protect the real estate market from the excesses of the lenders.

 

[George Hatch]

Now you are jumping to a sarcastic extreme example- .since it is clear appraisers have not held out for 1k n or 30 day turn times, and in fact have twisted themselves into pretzels accommodating 48 hour turn times and lower fees to facilitate lender work why bring such an extreme,.

Straw charges about guaranteed income...nobody is asking for that either..

Uhhhh, yeah. I am using the extreme to illustrate the reality that it's none of your business (or mine) what these users consider to be meaningful to their usage except to identify what those expectations are in order to meet them. They don't work for us, we work for them. We don't make the decisions at hand, and neither do the borrowers; the lenders make those decisions.

 

[gregb]

How did i miss the surveymonkey?

https://www.amrock.com/wp-content/uploads/Appraisers/03_0349.pdf