Tell us how you really feel about appraisers ...

[jay trotta]

Can't argue with any of that. I was just making the point that public perception is that Zillow can do what we do. In which case, $500 seems costly and unnecessary.

Couple of weeks ago at a closing, an attorney asked why the buyer was paying $16k above market value (I did not ask where that info came from) it didn't matter, there was an appraisal waiver involved. Why, because it was a bidding war #1 - secondly Zillow had it pegged at $140k above the settle price.

IMO public trust is always at risk because there are too many people trying to put their thumb in the dyke to stop the natural flow of real estate. Lenders on the other hand truly could care less what the value is unless, it's a foreclosure, flood / earthquake or fire damaged property.

 

[djd09]

FINALLY! President Trump Set to Sign Executive Order to CRACK DOWN on Woke Banks Targeting Conservatives​

no worries...jpepstien can write all the SOW they want

 

[glenn walker]

Buying high and selling higher actually works in a strong bull market. Lol )

 

[djd09]

is jpestien slanderish...

 

[George Hatch]

hold on...fannie is stealing our data...giving it to the scum bag mortgage brokers...to steal and undercut our businesses and put unknowing borrowers underwater and this is ethical...hello warnock???

That's what lawsuits are for. To seek legal remedies.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

I don't disagree with that. The point remains, however, that 'public trust' cannot be maintained by individual appraisers. It simply is not possible to accomplish at the individual level. In light of that, any attempt at pushing that onus on individual appraisers is disingenuous. It shouldn't even be in USPAP, as USPAP applies to the individual, not the sum. It should be in an AI Mission Statement or similar.

Incorrect. Public trust cannot be maintained by individual appraisers, and any attempt to push that onus on individual appraisers is disingenuous. Period.

Your perspective...way beyond the level of consideration that I personally ever gave to USPAP, or any regulatory document. Curious: Does that line of reasoning have a generic term that distinguishes responsibility for compliance between individual practitioner, and practitioners as a whole?

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

The footbone is connected to the kneebone

Your personal reputation is based on your personal performance.​

Our group reputation is based on our group performance.​

Every single example being cited in support of the "appraisers-r-racists" talking point has emanated from a single appraiser's assignment. Whether that complaint was well-founded or not. Over time they have accrued and they have been used by our critics to advance their agenda.

That's an example of how the actions of the individual travel beyond the individual.

On the other side of the coin, every single referral from a lender or a peer also emanate from the previous performance by that appraiser and subsequently passed along by that peer or client. "That appraiser is a credit to their profession" may not get expressed in those terms but that is what a referral amounts to.

The footbone is connected to the kneebone

Maybe never before in the history of public debate has a counterpoint been transitioned as succinctly as your comment above. Still early in the morning, but I'm dying laughing [and kinda envious of your wit...]

 

[DWiley]

Couple of weeks ago at a closing, an attorney asked why the buyer was paying $16k above market value (I did not ask where that info came from) it didn't matter, there was an appraisal waiver involved. Why, because it was a bidding war #1 - secondly Zillow had it pegged at $140k above the settle price.

IMO public trust is always at risk because there are too many people trying to put their thumb in the dyke to stop the natural flow of real estate. Lenders on the other hand truly could care less what the value is unless, it's a foreclosure, flood / earthquake or fire damaged property.

I think some of the confusion comes from the way different people use the phrase "appraisal waiver." In this group, it means no appraisal. Among agents and attorneys it can often mean that there was an appraisal (because a lender required it) but there was also a waiver clause in the contract, and the buyer willingly paid more.

My neighbor three doors down chose to pay $50,000 over the appraised value from the lender's appraisal. When we talk about real estate stuff, he often refers to his "appraisal waiver."

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Nope. My reputation has not been damaged one single bit by any accusations of bias. The reason why is because, by performing services in a credible manner, I can uphold my own reputation. I cannot affect the outcome of how the 'public' regards appraisal services. I can only affect the outcome of how my clients regard my appraisal services.

Again - is the public trust upheld by appraisers who perform credible services? Yes. Is it my job to uphold public trust? Absolutely not.

For the record, and with respect to 'bias' allegations, it's interesting that example is cited. As it turns out, the narrative was developed IN SPITE of appraisers performing credible services.

Welll....I personally do my duty to the public trust by offing all BK clients an option to pay me when they are able to do so, within a reasonable period of time, because the last thing they need when facing BK is another COD invoice. Of couse the successful BK would wipe out their obligation to pay, but I got burnt only once of a few dozen assignments, with every client very appreciative, while I make sure that the lawyers who refer their clients to me are aware that I do it to support their client relationship as well.

 

[alebrewer]

Your perspective...way beyond the level of consideration that I personally ever gave to USPAP, or any regulatory document. Curious: Does that line of reasoning have a generic term that distinguishes responsibility for compliance between individual practitioner, and practitioners as a whole?

Not sure I understand the question entirely, but USPAP is written as guidance at the transactional level - which is how it should be. It's a guide for developing and reporting 'an appraisal'. Public trust, however, is a MUCH more broad concept. It refers to 'the public' as a single entity, connoting that 'public trust' is something 'upheld' at the societal level, and not the transactional level. Even GH (defender of appraisers being required to uphold the public trust) sees the concept as encompassing more of a 'societal' or 'collective' opinion than the concept living at the transactional level, as he proffered appraisal bias as an example of how appraisers can fail to maintain the public trust (of course, as it turns out, that narrative wasn't the result of appraisers failing to uphold the public trust, but rather a sensational news grab).

Of course, the authors of USPAP offer no definition of what 'public trust' is, which makes it even more of a conundrum for appraisers who are bullied into feeling tasked to somehow uphold it. That said, though, one cannot operate at the transactional level AND affect national opinion. That can only be done by groups who have exposure at the national level - i.e. those who have the bandwidth to affect a change in 'public trust'. Examples of such organizations would include TAF, AI, NAA, ASA, etc.

Not sure if that answers your question, and of course my opinion may, or may not, be shared by anyone else on the planet.