The Premier Online Community for Real Estate Appraisers!
-
Welcome to AppraisersForum.com, the premier online
community for the discussion of real estate appraisal. Register a free account to be able to post and unlock additional forums and features.
StreetLinks - New Limited Desk Review Product
- Thread starter Tony Ebeyer
- Start date
- Status
residentialguy
Elite Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2009
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Minnesota
DJ...you have an AMC that doesn't want to fight for appraisals, instead, they try to push a superior BPO, which, if accepted by the lenders, will take away more appraisals from the appraiser...and you say "this product can be very useful. Good luck with it."
The answer to your "really?" question is: YES
Not to mention that these AMCs, that you're patting on the back, keep you on a rotation basis, which is keeping you from getting work because you are better than all the rest of the appraisers.
The answer to your "really?" question is: YES
Not to mention that these AMCs, that you're patting on the back, keep you on a rotation basis, which is keeping you from getting work because you are better than all the rest of the appraisers.
DJBanas
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2005
- Professional Status
- Retired Appraiser
- State
- Pennsylvania
ResGuy:
If you had given the explanation in the first response I would have been fine with that. I just objected to the personal characterization in the image. This is an open forum and I have nothing against being critized or contradicted. I learn a lot here from all opinions.
If you had given the explanation in the first response I would have been fine with that. I just objected to the personal characterization in the image. This is an open forum and I have nothing against being critized or contradicted. I learn a lot here from all opinions.
residentialguy
Elite Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2009
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Minnesota
Sorry, you're right...tell you what. I'll edit the post and remove the photo. Hopefully we're on the same team.
Kevin Mc
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2004
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- New York
I would guess a large number of those qualified people don't do fast and cheap. Reasonable yes, cheap no. They don't work into the parasitic plans of the big box lenders and AMCs.
Parasitism is a type of symbiotic relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the host.
residentialguy
Elite Member
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2009
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Minnesota
Well, thank you for that. Same here. Sometimes it is easy to make things personal when you are on a subject that deals with destroying the appraisal industry. I appreciate you keeping me in check as to the purpose of this forum, which is to better the appraisal profession.
**whacks Greg**
D
Deleted member 77547
Guest
From the form....
(C) UNACCEPTABLE: I have reviewed the comparables selected. One or more of the comparables included within the Original
Appraisal Report were NOT among the best available or adequate/appropriate for use in the reconciliation of the Sales
Comparison Approach to value. The primary reasons for disagreement and the recommended replacement comparable(s) are as follows:
Primary Reasons for disagreement with the Comparables selected:
I wonder (doubt) if the "reviewer" will be provided with the necessary information e.g., SOW,, a list of client requirements and UW stips/responses the original appraiser had to work under so that the answer to this question can be answered in its proper context. Perhaps an appropriate response may be something like this:
The primary reason for disagreement of two of the comparables selected lies with the client requirement of requiring two 90 day sales. Replacement comparables are not offered here because there were no comparables that reflected the subject in terms of age, size, quality and condition in the past 90 days.
(C) UNACCEPTABLE: I have reviewed the comparables selected. One or more of the comparables included within the Original
Appraisal Report were NOT among the best available or adequate/appropriate for use in the reconciliation of the Sales
Comparison Approach to value. The primary reasons for disagreement and the recommended replacement comparable(s) are as follows:
Primary Reasons for disagreement with the Comparables selected:
I wonder (doubt) if the "reviewer" will be provided with the necessary information e.g., SOW,, a list of client requirements and UW stips/responses the original appraiser had to work under so that the answer to this question can be answered in its proper context. Perhaps an appropriate response may be something like this:
The primary reason for disagreement of two of the comparables selected lies with the client requirement of requiring two 90 day sales. Replacement comparables are not offered here because there were no comparables that reflected the subject in terms of age, size, quality and condition in the past 90 days.
Last edited by a moderator:
Bearslide
Senior Member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2004
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Pennsylvania
I'll give Tony credit for trying to be competitive and for posting.
However, I have a serious problem with what the lenders NEED is what they WANT thought process.
That is the very mentality that has gotten us to where we are - our economy in shambles and the appraisal profession nearly destroyed. What the lenders NEED is what the taxpayer also NEEDS - competent, qualified, LOCAL appraisers doing local work and being paid as the professionals they are. What the lenders WANT is the same thing they have always wanted - cheapest, fastest, make their deals work.
If the lenders WANTED competency, they would either be hiring it directly or making sure their pet AMC does. Not happening - and under the current AMC model, it is not going to happen. More layers of checking on the checker to compete with easily manipulated AVMs and number for hire BPOs. Who loses? The appraiser and the taxpayer.
However, I have a serious problem with what the lenders NEED is what they WANT thought process.
That is the very mentality that has gotten us to where we are - our economy in shambles and the appraisal profession nearly destroyed. What the lenders NEED is what the taxpayer also NEEDS - competent, qualified, LOCAL appraisers doing local work and being paid as the professionals they are. What the lenders WANT is the same thing they have always wanted - cheapest, fastest, make their deals work.
If the lenders WANTED competency, they would either be hiring it directly or making sure their pet AMC does. Not happening - and under the current AMC model, it is not going to happen. More layers of checking on the checker to compete with easily manipulated AVMs and number for hire BPOs. Who loses? The appraiser and the taxpayer.
- Status