Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[DWiley]

I assumned it was something specific for fannie mae. I did not learn about (Eape,, FNC, etc)them re-selling my intellectual property for profit to other parties until several years later."

"Perhaps that research should have been done before giving your written permission rather than after. Are you saying you signed this without knowing what it meant? Do you continue to grant written permission for distribution of appraisal reports to data collection/reporting services?"

People can twist and spin however they want, but they cannot escape their signature below Cert 21. The, "I didn't realize what I have been signing for 15 years" defense is a stretch (to put it very mildly).

FWIW, I agree that the appraisers should be the ones reaping any rewards that come from assembling data from appraisal reports. However, that requires appraisers to participate in assembling the database, and most have rejected that concept.

 

[Workbox]

FWIW, that cert 21 is a huge loophole that has to be closed to protect the American Public.

 

[woodyva]

if you send something in PDF, I have never had a problem there either, using a delivery method like sure receipts, it works well. I have had no problems there.

The problem with Cert 21 on the FNMA form is that it is either do it or starve for many people. Human beings are mostly ethical except when they need to rpovide for their families. I would choose not to be in business with some people I have had to be in business with in the past, but the fact remains, my son and wife exceed my ability to say no. That does not mean I have broken the law, just that all of us are forced to compromise on some levels. That still does not make Fannie right, more often than not they have proven to be of the greed mentality with these issues.

Besides why should they fret about it, when they screw up they make all of us pay for it. So if we have an issue with it, can we not try and change it?

 

[Ken B]

FWIW, that cert 21 is a huge loophole that has to be closed to protect the American Public.

Don't you mean to protect appraisers who are are trying to argue that they are not selling data when they accept a fee for a report which contains that data? As I have said before, if you think the fee is not adequate compensation for the data you provide, ask for a larger fee.

 

[Fred]

Can I use your quote the next time my local MRIS bills me for access to "their data"...

I would prefer you don't use my name at all.

 

[Bearslide]

The problem with Cert 21 is the same problem with so many other things - it snuck by us. How many appraisers read it and commented on it during the Fannie comment period? I would bet not many - most of us were more concerned with the form itself, and let that one sneak right on by. However - it is ambiguous enough that it is open to challenge.

PDF's are readily available to all, with no special software necessary. With an authentic digital signature, the ultimate reader would know if the report had been tampered with. AND - one of my clients just sent me a new contract. In it, they state that all major forms of software are acceptable, with report provided in PDF format, for electronic QC review.

There you have it - way back in this thread I asked that question and was told it would be too difficult to enable electronic QC reviews of PDF's. Wrong. Bottom line - it can readily be done, and is being done. There is NO need for conversion programs with the stated goal of "electronic QC review". The smoke keeps getting in my eyes.............

 

[Fred]

If you used a Fannie Mae form, then you gave permission for the report to be sent to data collection/reporting services -

As you posted several times in this thread already - which appraisers should know because they are careful about what they sign.

 

[DTB]

Just because I sell you an engine that I assembled with all genuine GM parts, doesn't make you an authorized reseller of those parts upon disassembly.

Give it a whirl sometime, try to do it to someone other than appraisers. I'll bake the cake with the file (pun intended).

 

[Fred]

"them re-selling my intellectual property

I think you can make a reasonable claim that the analysis and conclusions are you intellectual property. I don't see how you can claim facts as your property.

 

[DWiley]

The problem with Cert 21 is the same problem with so many other things - it snuck by us.

It only snuck by those not reading what they were signing. A statement about distrubution of reports to data companies has been part of the Fannie Mae forms since at least 1993. Of course, many posts in this forum demonstrate clearly that not everyone reads what they sign.

There is NO need for conversion programs with the stated goal of "electronic QC review".

Yes, one can QC a report in PDF format, but only after converting it to some other format. One can also climb the stairs to the top of most skyscrapers. Does that prove that the elevators are not needed?