UAD 3.6 discussion

[timd354]

Because it is deceptive to fudge what is being done -words matter.

You invented this $400/$200 example from a $600 by saying it would be unchanged if lenders had to pay a hard cost SEPARATE from the appraisal fee.
Did you not understand what the lender paying an AMC a COST as separate from the appraisal fee meant?

If a lender wants to pay an AMC $200 per order to an AMC for processing as a COST borne by the lender, so be it. But do you really believe lenders would pay $200 an order if it came out of their own operating funds?
Yes or no answer, please.

What the lenders pay for any service never comes out of their own pocket as they always find a way to pass all cost on to the borrower whether it is by increasing their junk fees or the interest rate, etc. If you think otherwise, you are supremely naive.

You repeat the same thing over and over ad nauseuum in the apparent hope that somehow the 5th, 15th or 50th time you state it, it is going conivnce someone.

 

[J Grant]

What the lenders pay for any service never comes out of their own pocket as they always find a way to pass all cost on to the borrower whether it is by increasing their junk fees or the interest rate, etc. If you think otherwise, you are supremely naive.

You repeat the same thing over and over ad nauseuum in the apparent hope that somehow the 5th, 15th or 50th time you state it, it is going conivnce someone.

Okay, then my position is let the lenders pass the cost on to the borrower rather than take it out of the appraisal fee that reaches the appraiser.

I post here for the same reasons you do—to make people aware and exchange ideas. I am tired of the spin and disinfiomaion out there about why fees are what they are on the AMC side, FWIW.

 

[timd354]

Not about increasing fees. It’s about transparency and ethics. It’s a public trust thing. Remember how that phrase used to be a cornerstone of this profession. Now it’s a punch line.

Appraisers should never use the phrase "public trust" whenever they are discussing fees if they want to retain any credibility. Everyone knows that appraisers are pissed about the fees they are being paid and that has nothing to do with any notion of public trust. In any case, the term public trust as it is used in USPAP, is directed at appraisers, not lenders, AMC's or any other entity. This is why the preamle to USPAP states: “The appraiser’s responsibility is to protect the overall public trust…”

Just think about how the following sounds to the average borrower who knows nothing about appraisals....."In order to increase public trust, (I (the appraiser) need to be paid more money." This is probably not the message that appraisers want to be sending.

 

[timd354]

Okay, then my position is let the lenders pass the cost on to the borrower rather than take it out of the appraisal fee that reaches the appraiser.

I post here for the same reasons you do—to make people aware and exchange ideas. I am tired of the spin and disinfiomaion out there about why fees are what they are on the AMC side, FWIW.

Okay, but that will not result in any increase of fees paid to the appraiser by AMCs.....but if you want pursue something that will make no difference, it is a free country so you can do whatever you want to do.

 

[chad hampton]

Appraisers should never use the phrase "public trust" whenever they are discussing fees if they want to retain any credibility. Everyone knows that appraisers are pissed about the fees they are being paid and that has nothing to do with any notion of public trust. In any case, the term public trust as it is used in USPAP, is directed at appraisers, not lenders, AMC's or any other entity. This is why the preamle to USPAP states: “The appraiser’s responsibility is to protect the overall public trust…”

Just think about how the following sounds to the average borrower who knows nothing about appraisals....."In order to increase public trust, (I (the appraiser) need to be paid more money." This is probably not the message that appraisers want to be sending.

I think you missed the point. That’s ok.

 

[djd09]

Not about increasing fees. It’s about transparency and ethics. It’s a public trust thing. Remember how that phrase used to be a cornerstone of this profession. Now it’s a punch line.

Top Bank Executives Reveal Obama Pressured Them To Debank Conservatives​

The truth always comes to light.

Major bank executives have spoken out and revealed they were under pressure from both the Obama and Biden administrations to debank conservatives.

The executives revealed that the Obama and Biden administrations initiated Operation Choke Point and Operation Choke Point 2.0 in an attempt to target conservatives by pressuring banks through regulatory measures.

Top Bank Executives Reveal Obama Pressured Them To Debank Conservatives * 100PercentFedUp.com * by Anthony

The truth always comes to light. Major bank executives have spoken out and revealed they were under pressure from both […]

100percentfedup.com

they left the most corrupt in charge of appraisals...

 

[timd354]

I think you missed the point. That’s ok.

I fully understand the point you were trying to make. Everyone knows that you and other appraisers are pissed off about fees (and rightfully so in many cases), however I don't think it serves the profession well to mix the fee discussion with "protecting the public trust".....You ceertainly don't want to imply that appraisers are not going to uphold their duty to proect the public trust unless they are paid a higher fee.

 

[NC Appraising]

Protecting the public.....

Most of the public are in the mortgage world 1-3 times during their lives. They don't have a clue what is going on.

The public applies for a loan. Pays $600 for the so called appraisal cough here.

Come to find out, the appraisal...cough now....cost really $400. The AMC took $200.

Protect the public....
What if the AMC was able to find another appraiser for $300? Why should the AMC keep the $100? That's theft in my opinion. The borrower CANNOT shop for the lowest appraiser but the AMC can and keep the borrowers money.? What world does that make any dam sense?

The lender always gives a range for the cost of the appraisal.

All things being equal, if the AMC was able to find another appraiser at $300 THE BORROWER SHOULD KEEP THE OVERAGE, NOT THE AMC. It is the BORROWERS MONEY not the lender.

Theft.

That being said, we are assuming that all things are equal. Again we know that all is not equal. In too many cases, the lowest fee usually equals churn and burn skippy, but not in all cases. Again, the PUBLIC cannot select the appraiser based on quality or reviews, similar to Angie's List.

We need a cost plus model.

 

[NC Appraising]

I'm a contractor that gives you a estimate of $10-15k. It maybe $15k if unknown incidents occurs or overages.

Well, the project ran fine with no known overages or incidents.

Should I keep the $5,000?

No, it would be unethical.

 

[Dublin ohio]

The lender always gives a range for the cost of the appraisal.

I do believe that the TRID has to give an exact amount