Sounds like MN is joining the Dirty Board List

[kerrylanger]

The impact may be nothing or it could be something. It all depends on the the loan fees paid, who paid them, were they rolled into the sales price, did the seller carry back a second to make the sale work and as a result raised the price, etc. It used to be VA and FHA added certain loan costs to the sales price so they could be included in the loan. It all depends, but you don't know until you examine and analyze the available sales and financing data for the sales comparables.
:new_multi:

I agree with Tim. What difference would it make as far as type of financing is concerned? I always adjusted for concessions and such in a different spot on the grid below the financing type.

 

[Vegan702]

Financing may play a role in how the home is marketed and to which buyers it is marketed to. Say it is a home that can't go FHA or VA and is in an area where a majority of the sales are done that way. You just eliminated over half of your potential buyers. I would think that would be significant andmay warrant an adjustment.

 

[CCAAMO]

Financing may play a role in how the home is marketed and to which buyers it is marketed to. Say it is a home that can't go FHA or VA and is in an area where a majority of the sales are done that way. You just eliminated over half of your potential buyers. I would think that would be significant andmay warrant an adjustment.

The problem is there are many appraisers who have not been in real estate long enough to have seen a true buyer's market where you have all kinds of creative financing by the sellers which create a higher sales price for the subject.

 

[kerrylanger]

The problem is there are many appraisers who have not been in real estate long enough to have seen a true buyer's market where you have all kinds of creative financing by the sellers which create a higher sales price for the subject.

I believe it was a true buyer's market when I started out in real estate in 1989. I remember tons of sellers offering contract for deeds and other incentives. Lots of foreclosures. You could pick up a decent condo/townhouse for $5K. Wish I had the cash back then, but I was only 19.

In this particular case, however, the appraiser said it was conventional because that is what the source said it was. The appraiser also verified it with the realtor. The state says it was cash (not sure what the source is). I still don't think it deserves a punishment.

 

[xmmcsmielr]

Broken USPAP enforcement

With very few exceptions, USPAP enforcement is broken in the U.S. Boards around the country haven't demonstrated any continuous ability to get the job done. Appraisal fraud is still rampant, after 15 years of USPAP and even after mortgage appraising is under a microscope during the subprime mess.

Three thousand dollars for non existent violations, with a threat of increases, if the case goes to a different body? Sounds like something the Arizona Board would do, IF they had the power to impose fines. Actually, it sounds like the Saudi Arabian court's intensified penalty from 100 to 200 lashes, when that woman protested the initial penalty for being gang raped to a higher court.

Fines could be a great USPAP enforcement tool, BUT ONLY IF JUSTLY APPLIED for egregious violations. Focusing on picayunish stuff and finding errors where none exist creates deep disrespect for the regulators. If boards of appraisal keep this stuff up, we're going to see some appraiser go postal at his or her state's board meeting. One Arizona appraiser is in superior court, fighting an Arizona Board's highly questionable action, even after the Court criticized the Board's reviewer errors.

It sounds like the appraiser who received the $3,000 penalty ought to individually sue each of his or her Board members for unjust decisions which violate his or her civil rights.

I am sooo glad that I have one year to go until I'm 62 years old. At that point, my feet go up on my appraisal desk, and my wife and I start full time on our play time, which will include travel, photography, book reading, hiking, going to art galeries, movies and other things that are much, much more fun than trying to participate in the enforcement of USPAP by reporting violations and posting Forum editorials about how bad the Arizona Board of Appraisal is.

 

[CCAAMO]

I believe it was a true buyer's market when I started out in real estate in 1989. I remember tons of sellers offering contract for deeds and other incentives. Lots of foreclosures. You could pick up a decent condo/townhouse for $5K. Wish I had the cash back then, but I was only 19.

In this particular case, however, the appraiser said it was conventional because that is what the source said it was. The appraiser also verified it with the realtor. The state says it was cash (not sure what the source is). I still don't think it deserves a punishment.

It would be hard to believe that the conv. vs. cash item would by itself be the reason for a fine or board action, especially since they did not indicate an adjustment was warrented. It sounds like the main issue is the basement and they threw the finance item in to help their case.

 

[Scott Lanz]

In November, the MN Dept of Commerce started linking the details of the enforcement actions.

Scott J. Lanz

 

[kerrylanger]

In November, the MN Dept of Commerce started linking the details of the enforcement actions.

Scott J. Lanz

I just recently noticed that. I've noticed the fine amounts are steadily increasing as well. There used to be fines for $250. It seems that $3K is their magic number now.