Voice of the Appraiser In-Depth Report

[alebrewer]

As I understand it, there really is no significant change with respect to SOW. The appraiser has always been required to very - to the extent possible - any information used in his/her analyses, including any discrepancies noted between MLS, public records, PDC's, personal inspection(s), surveys, etc. I don't see how any of that has changed?

 

[CGinMN]

The problem with this thread, and many others, is that I am the only one who is actually going directly to the source instead of attempting to conflate the matter to fit a preconceived notion of what should be. The mere fact that the GSEs are updating the language on the forms to include the qualifier "to the extent possible" tells us everything we need to know.

 

[George Hatch]

I wouldn't exactly call references to the long history of the usage of the current #10 as being some PFA backfill rationalization. Not to mention the point that #10 does not exist in isolation. That isn't mindlessly backing into any conclusions either.

Back when the GSEs issued exposure drafts for the current 1004 we had several complaints about the disconnect between the GSEs version of appraising vs USPAP and the prevailing concepts of appraising. The GSEs basically ignored them all and did what they wanted to do anyway. That forced (some) appraisers to engage in some elaboration and clarification in order to convey what they were trying to do.

So WRT to the current controversies, there's nothing new or particularly devious in AppraiserLand when Fannie/Freddie act in their own interests in how they structure their own defensive position in their programs. Nobody should be interpreting their position to be any different from any other entity on the money side of these transactions. They advocate for their own position.

 

[djd09]

the whole mantra of the pdc is that the unethical stakeholders think you are a racist...dividing you from the borrower is the only way forward woke jokes

 

[George Hatch]

And to starve you out.

 

[djd09]

well duh... avm + paschal inspection + chief appraisers compliance signature = one world appraising...you are way behind the curve

 

[Sadie]

I've never read a reg that states the appraisers are required to use information they know to be incorrect. Citation, please?

Your SOW does not include independent verification of anything other than what is available w/o a site visits. That includes SF, condition, etc. You just sit on your butt and give them an MVE, your signature, license # and E and O. Sure, you can back out if you find errors and ask to have it elevated to a full appraisal, but the client doesn't have to. And we all know that county records is always correct as are the measuring apps, right? You want to trust an untrainded person on condition and quality of a home? Fannie and Freddie both say they train the collectors but do they really? I think it is one class, if that.

 

[alebrewer]

Your SOW does not include independent verification of anything other than what is available w/o a site visits. That includes SF, condition, etc. You just sit on your butt and give them an MVE, your signature, license # and E and O. Sure, you can back out if you find errors and ask to have it elevated to a full appraisal, but the client doesn't have to. And we all know that county records is always correct as are the measuring apps, right? You want to trust an untrainded person on condition and quality of a home? Fannie and Freddie both say they train the collectors but do they really? I think it is one class, if that.

Appreciate the rant, but I was asking for the citation on where you found the reg that required appraisers to use information they know is incorrrect.

 

[Sadie]

Read Cert 10 and ask yourself if it could be interpreted to apply to the data collection report. Don’t tell me what you think it means. Tell me what someone with unchecked authority, such a state board or the GSEs demanding a repurchase, could argue or interpret it to mean.

Here’s what I think: The appraiser is supposed to verify all information that comes from the lender. That includes the PDC.

Without a site visit, you may noe be able to adequately verify. You can put all of the caveats in that you want and attempt to CYA, but you are still kind of stuck with a big unknown in your report. The reliability of the PDC. Think of all the reviews you have done over your career. Some reports are good and some kind of stink. And these are from trainded appraisers. Now add untrained PDC to the mix. Will it increase or decrease the soundness of the MVE?

 

[djd09]

pdc is a lie...they are unlicensed home inspectors...or uhi