StreetLinks - New Limited Desk Review Product

[Non Sequitur]

For those who want to compete with AVMs and BPOs here's what you're facing:

Hello!

XXXX XXXXX is continuing to grow... and is in need of more BPO Reviewers!

Since you know what this job entails, I thought I would ask you if you know any qualified Appraisers who may be interested in joining our team. We are looking for the following characteristics in a potential BPO Reviewer:

1) Licensed or Certified Appraiser with a current license
2) Ability to navigate websites
3) Keen eye for detail
4) Self-motivation

If you know anyone who may be interested, please have them e-mail their resumes to Satan@sellyoursoul.org.

Thank you so much!

Sincerely,

xxxxx xxxxx
Human Resources Team
xxxx xxxxxx

So no need for anymore new "products", the market is already producing them. And how much does an appraiser earn for a BPO review? C'mon don't be afraid. Are you ready?

The answer is.........
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
$5 per report.

Now how many of you think you can compete with AVMs and BPOs?

 

[Tony Ebeyer]

When the Indiana bill is signed into law, USPAP Standard 3 reviews of appraisals on property located in Indiana that are performed by an AMC must be performed by an appraiser who is licensed in Indiana

Tony, that is the new Indiana law requirements is it not? Your firm must hire competent local and licensed in our state. Is this part of fulfilling that requirement?

Doug,

I'm not sure that I understand your question. SCORe and all other appraisal products (review or otherwise) are always performed by appraisers licensed in the state of the subject property.

Tony Ebeyer

 

[CANative]

This "product" has problems such as conflicts in what is being asked of the reviewer and the certifications and scope of work statement. For one thing, why is there a definition of market value if the reviewer is not providing an opinion of value? For another, check out this conflict...

The purpose of this assignment is to develop and report an opinion as to the completeness, adequacy, accuracy, and relevance of the original
appraiser's comparable selection. Implicit within making the above determination, the review appraiser must develop an opinion as to the
appropriateness of the appraisal methods and techniques utilized by the original appraiser in completing the comparable selection process.

Then it goes on to say:

Based upon the EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION that the subject property's features, condition and characteristics are accurately described within
the original report, and within the context of attempting to provide a report that is compliant with agency and traditional secondary market lending
guidelines, please determine if the comparables provided within the original appraisal report are physically, functionally and locationally the most
similar comparables available as of the effective date of the appraisal and report your findings in the appropriate section below.

The first and second statements conflict with other. On the one hand the appraiser is directed to DEVELOP an opinion of appropriateness of the methods and techniques used in the work under review. On the other hand there is a statement that the appraiser did not DEVELOP this opinion but rather used an EXTRAORDINARY ASSUMPTION.

In any case, this is not an appropriate use of an EA. An extraordinary assumption is for situations where information is unknown but presumed to be true. How can the information be unknown if it's right there in front of the appraiser? You're trying to use an EA to reduce the amount of time the reviewer spends on the "product."

 

[Offshore]

When completing one of these fine products, I wonder if they want the Declarations page of the E & O policy to be the first or last page of package? :icon_idea:

 

[CANative]

And while I'm still thinking about it:

What if the property is unique or the market has very little activity and the comps are the only sales available and therefore the "best?" Yet the work under review did not make appropriate adjustments? If the lender just wants a yes or no question as to whether or not the comps are the best then this implies a "yes" response means that the value opinion is also correct and this may not be the case.

What they "want" is not always what they "need."

I don't mean to hurt your feelings or mock you in any way, but this "product" is garbage and it's going to get you sued.

Rels tried what amounts to the same thing with a "product" they were hawking a year or two ago. They'd send a URAR Page 2 and ask the "reviewer" to opine if the comps were the best available and appropriate. They wanted to pay $45. It went over like a lead balloon.

 

[JRS at OBX]

If I have to pick more appropriate comps, I've just performed an appraisal and opined a value range. The desk review just became an appraisal and I better have a whole lot of stuff in my file.

 

[MKBURNETT]

Do you really think 150. Desk reviews are much cheaper. I am guessing 35-45 is what they wanna pay or "even less" as they see it as you "get it done in 30 minutes". Are they sending the BPO's now to appraisal companies to review? Because no appraiser who is still sane would do a review every 5 minutes from anywhere in the county and have your signature to validate it as an appraisal? So now they might send it to the AMC's and try? I am guessing most of us will be in "another job" anyway as we can not pay the overhead and our bills. So then what?

 

[OSU Beavers]

Then an MLS search by a geo-competent appraiser can provide lenders with a second opinion as to the adequacy of comp selection.

It's still garbage in, garbage out. What if the best comps are not in the MLS. What if the Realtor put the wrong photos in the MLS. And you know all property condition comments are either A-1 excellent or REO El Dumpo.

If you are truly using local appraisers then a few extra bucks to drive the subject and comps would be worth it.

 

[Non Sequitur]

I am guessing most of us will be in "another job" anyway as we can not pay the overhead and our bills. So then what?

The sun will rise and the world will go on.

And as far as the "product", who cares whether or not if it's USPAP compliant? At the prices of AVMs and BPOs, which even the OP admits is why lenders use them, the "product" is a non-starter. AVMs and BPOs exist and are used because of price NOT quality or credibility.

 

[Doug DeMars]

Greg-
Excellent points all the way through...

Tony-
Any review product that doesn't attempt to pay at least 1.5X the cost of an initial product should be viewed with caution. One of the biggest jokes in the appraisal profession is the function of the "review". When done properly, it takes almost as much time to conduct a thorough review of a report than it would to just start from scratch...and that's when the value conclusion is reasonable. When a different value conclusion become clear, we're talking another 50% more time to provide a new opinion. It would be much easier if the "review" appraiser didn't review and simply provide a retro-spective opinion based upon page 1 info (assuming page 1 is decent enough to extract credible data).

By trying to save time and I would assume money...they are simply getting a rubber stamp saying "Yep...the original report is "crap"...and here's my "crap" stamp"

What happens when the review appraiser who, after making $12 an hour decides to not rubber stamp the garbage (and due to having too much time on their hands) says...nope...the comps provided are not the best. Are they then now obligated to provide which Comps are better? Now the review appraiser is making $6 an hour. There's no incentive with these products to go the extra mile.

Those with a conscience have better things to do.