TAF head Calls Jonathan Miller a Liar

[djd09]

Well.... your new title should at least get you into a cocktail party at 15th Street. Just make sure to wear a wire tap...

 

[Mejappz]

one day, the appraiser gestapos will send us to room 101, ties us to a chair, and make us watch lowballed on loop...

Along with having someone read USPAP to us line by line. Talk about torture.

 

[djd09]

FFIEC Issues Statement on Examination Principles Related to Valuation Discrimination and Bias in Residential Lending​

On February 12, 2024, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) issued a statement of principles that relate to valuation discrimination and bias for its member entities to consider in preparation for their consumer compliance and safety and soundness examinations. The FFIEC specifically states that this statement should neither be interpreted as new guidance, nor signal an increased focus on appraisal practices. Instead, the FFIEC frames this statement as providing transparency into the examination process. The statement comes in the wake of a rule proposed in June 2023 by the six federal agencies aimed at implementing quality control standards for use of automated valuation models (AVMs).


The FFIEC statement


In the statement, the FFIEC communicates principles for examination of supervised institutions that will “(i) mitigate risks that may arise due to potential discrimination or bias in those practices, and (ii) promote credible valuations” with regards to residential property appraisal and evaluation practices. The statement reiterates that real estate valuations are an important aspect in underwriting for residential real estate lending, and that as part of the supervision process, examiners assess institutions’ compliance management systems and risk management practices for identifying and mitigating potential discrimination or bias in residential property valuations.

How this development may affect your business


This statement provides principles that examiners will implement in both consumer compliance and safety and soundness examinations. Financial institutions should carefully review these principles to determine whether their current policies and procedures conform to them. Further, institutions should consider adopting the statement’s principles to enhance the likelihood that they will receive favorable outcomes in their consumer compliance and safety and soundness examinations and to lay the foundation for implementing the AVM interagency final rule.

FFIEC Issues Statement on Examination Principles Related to Valuation Discrimination and Bias in Residential Lending

On February 12, 2024, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council issued a statement of principles that relate to valuation discrimination and bias for its member entities to consider in preparation for their consumer compliance and safety and soundness examinations.

www.huschblackwell.com

so to combat bias they will use an avm...another conspiracy come true...fricken crooked lawyers

 

[sputnam]

no wonder mckissock dropped parea...conflict of interest

I reckon McKissock dropped PAREA because they found out there is no profit in it. McKissock discovered what supervisory appraisers have known for a long time. It's expensive to train a real property appraiser.

 

[Non Sequitur]

I reckon McKissock dropped PAREA because they found out there is no profit in it. McKissock discovered what supervisory appraisers have known for a long time. It's expensive to train a real property appraiser.

Yep. I'm not a McKissock fan but give them credit for not sinking the ship in pursuit of a lost cause.

AI is still in partly because of grants and mostly because they think they can mint new SRAs. But last I heard none of the students can get through the course. And the "wine and dine the boards" MPAT developer is minting new "non" minority appraisers faster than the old guard (look her up on LinkedIn). Why? It's all about the $$$$.

It's a sad that no one will address the elephant in the room: Most residential work is loan origination. And that work is paying less than it was 20 years ago due to AMCs dominating the market with the residential field bleeding appraisers due to the lack of work in the last 18 months or so. I haven't seen all of the stats but the ones being posted in various groups are showing dramatic losses.

But the train will keep on a rollin'. I predict (depending on national politics) standards will be changed to allow rapid credentialing to achieve desired ratios in the field. At this point let's just get there, I would rather be done with the drama of it. And I know the reality of this field, the newly minted PAREA and MPAT puppies will quickly find out why no one practices in the middle of nowhere Mississippi and no one is training new puppies. I doubt many will stick around for the mess TAF/AI/NAA/AMCs, etc. have made of this profession.

I, for one, welcome our new insect overlords.

 

[chad hampton]

It’s such an easy solution to get new people into this profession. It doesn’t require YouTube “experience” or cutting big checks to the appraisal institute or any of the other nonsense that is thrown out there.

I had a great trainee experience from a supervisor that I was not related to.
The key was, I made him money, not the other way around.

 

[DWiley]

I had a great trainee experience from a supervisor that I was not related to.
The key was, I made him money, not the other way around.

Same for me. I was not trained by a relative. When I had my firm, we always had trainees, and none of them were ever relatives. We viewed it as a long term commitment to growing the business - and that meant the arrangement had to be beneficial to both parties, or the trainee would simply leave a soon as they got credentials of their own.

It is far easier to make training mutually beneficial in a firm with multiple appraisers, but the fact is most residential appraisers work as sole practitioners. The economics of training in a firm are very different than the economics of training in a one-person company. I do not mean that as any sort of criticism of those who work solo; it is just economic reality.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I was able to keep some of my trainees - at least on a part time basis - to handle overflow. At one point I was getting 10 to 20 assignments per week, far more than I could handle by myself. So, I had one fellow who did not want to go on his own. He was a short-timer who was trying to make it to retirement after losing his job as a vice HR fellow. When his boss was canned, his days were numbered. He was very good help. Another I finished training after my original partner died of cancer. She was training her step-daughter, who remains an appraiser today and we cooperate on projects to this day - referring work she doesn't do (She is CR) and I referring work I don't do (secondary market) to her. A third bounced around between me and another appraiser before finishing the last few years as my part -time assistant (she was part-time due to health issues with Lupus). I also helped one guy get his CG as he was already a CR - and a very good one- better than I.

 

[gregb]

I was able to keep some of my trainees - at least on a part time basis - to handle overflow.

It's likely none of these assignments involved AMC's skimming the fee.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

It's likely none of these assignments involved AMC's skimming the fee.

Nope. Never worked for an AMC. And yes, AMC taking a cut and low ball bidding strategy pretty much excludes any use of a trainee.