The New Appraisal Industry

[TerryRohrer]

- it's pretty easy for the users to ascertain the validity of an appraisal anyways.

So do they make that determination and then ignore it? I get some requests for reviews where they clearly have a problem if they relied on the appraisal I get a copy of, but seldom are any willing to pay a reasonable fee with enough time for an honest review. And I seldom get a request for review until months after a closing. There must be some glitch in that panacea.

 

[alebrewer]

Now there's no need to have an MB bully the appraiser into hitting a value to make a loan work.

The GSEs instead greenlight a waiver/value acceptance, where the mortgage lender fills in whatever property value they need to make a loan work ! (no appraisal is done. ) That is HUGE for the borrower. Not so much for the taxpayer.

As long as the mortgage lender's value or the sale price fit within the GSE AVM range - the AVM is done first to see if it works...like the forbidden comp checks of yore.

Maybe you missed the post I made just after that one. The world is different now than it was in the 90's and early 00's. The reason appraisers were 'king of the hill' then was because they held the data (well, them and the MLS's - which, by the way, were MUCH more stringent about access to the data than they are now). The appraisers no longer have that upper hand. As such, the users are free to employ their own analyses now, without having to rely on appraisers to do so.

 

[alebrewer]

So do they make that determination and then ignore it? I get some requests for reviews where they clearly have a problem if they relied on the appraisal I get a copy of, but seldom are any willing to pay a reasonable fee with enough time for an honest review. And I seldom get a request for review until months after a closing. There must be some glitch in that panacea.

I can only speak for my experience: No, they do not ignore it. As to what your clients are willing to pay, I cannot opine on that, as I'm not associated with your clients.

 

[John Hassler]

You forgot to point out the benefit to the borrower of the MB's bullying the appraisers into hitting whatever value made their loan work. That was HUGE for the borrower. Not so much for the taxpayer...

Easily eliminated if:

1) more appraisers had a backbone; and

2) Lenders use more due diligence in managing their appraiser panels.


Remember, no lender was ever forced to accept a loan package from a MB. Every lender did so voluntarily.

 

[djd09]

You forgot to point out the benefit to the borrower of the MB's bullying the appraisers into hitting whatever value made their loan work. That was HUGE for the borrower. Not so much for the taxpayer...

2008 was the floor compared to now...so keep trying to revise history without the no doc loans banker boy

 

[TerryRohrer]

Easily eliminated if:

1) more appraisers had a backbone; and

2) Lenders use more due diligence in managing their appraiser panels.


Remember, no lender was ever forced to accept a loan package from a MB. Every lender did so voluntarily.

And knowingly. No lender exists that didn't understand the regime.

 

[djd09]

Where in my post did I mentioned that ROV's or answering questions were not allowed?

value disputes are civil matters...that is why we have courts

 

[alebrewer]

Easily eliminated if:

1) more appraisers had a backbone; and

2) Lenders use more due diligence in managing their appraiser panels.


Remember, no lender was ever forced to accept a loan package from a MB. Every lender did so voluntarily.

it's a moot point now, huh? (or mute, depending on one's understanding of the word 'moot')

 

[George Hatch]

We are fully aware that the lenders are aware of it !!

It is not about the lender requiring the AMC to pay a minimum fee to the appraiser; it is about the lender paying the AMC a separate cost or fee to the AMC for the AMC service. Prohibit the fee split from the bundled appraisal fee going to the AMC.
Do you think lenders, or Fannie for that matter, would be using the AMCs if THEY ( the lender or Fannie ) had to pay the cost of the AMCs?

What people are trying to say is to stop treating us like children as if we are naive about the lender part . .

If you don't like it when I explain why the stupid things some of you are saying are stupid then stop saying them.

And while we're on the subject of tone policing, you're doing the same. Telling me I "don't understand" your problems despite me predicting in advance 15 years ago it would eventually turn out like this and despite me watching these complaints over all these years. So let's just call it reciprocity when I redirect your rage to it's true point of origin which is the lenders, not their AMC lackeys.

Oh yeah, and which now also includes Fannie since they - after all these years of experience with AMC appraisals - have also apparently come to their own conclusions about the utility of the AMC appraisals.

 

[alebrewer]

2008 was the floor compared to now...so keep trying to revise history without the no doc loans banker boy

I typically don't respond to persons I think particularly nasty, but in your and Terry's case, I assented. In your case - simply to thank you for the cool new title. I think I may have a plaque made for my desk - 'Banker Boy'. Love it!