What to do when you KNOW something is wrong

[Otis Key]

Interesting thread. I can see both sides of this arguement. However, I think some have gone from looking at the principal of the concept to the extreme of "big brother is watching" to a major concern. I, for one, think it's wrongly perceived.

If I get calls for "hitting a number" or to "review to the appraised value" which has happened, it throws a red flag up in front of me. I did get such a "review to the appraised value" request and told them I would be more than happy to review the report as required by SR3 and not to a specified value. It was immediately cancelled. Of course, that appraisal is now before the state board with a complaint as it was clearly a "predetermined minimum valuation" request. It has also violated various aspects of USPAP and inflated the opinion of value by using sales from a superior neighborhood.

As I see it, Pam has asked for the name of the appraiser (I question that but still see nothing wrong at this time), the address of the property (no problem) and the investor (How in the H3LL am I supposed to know that)? If I've cancelled the order, appraisal or review, then there is no "appraiser/client relationship" as nothing beyond the "carrot in front of the mule" approach has been established. I see nothing where a file is needed as there has been NO work performed.

Sure seems to be a real big uproar over something that all you have to say is "no - leave me out of it" or participate. If you don't want to participate, then don't. Kind of looks like the aspect of "do I help stop that store from getting robbed by the guy stuffing his pocket by telliing the clerk or do I walk on by?" If I do, then he gets caught. If I don't the store increases prices ----- AGAIN.

Pick your spot in the road! It's not being a CRUSADER, IMHO! It's making an informed decision about either doing something about all this fraud or not!

 

[Ms. Janet]

This office will not EVER file a complaint or pass on an address without having determined there is a problem based on a full work file.

And that, in our view, is how it should be done.

There's no process like due process

of course..................

 

[Ultraviolet]

IMO the APPRAISER WHO SAYS YES IS STILL THE PROBLEM!!!!!!!

Many of the people who call me or send orders with "minimum value needed" and other such language are very nice but clueless processors who have no idea why this practice is unacceptable. They're simply doing what the LO has asked them to do. I try to explain why I can't accept the order and they just say "thank you" and call until they find an appraiser who doesn't care about such pesky details.

I know I'm a broken record, but it's the APPRAISERS who are the main problem here. If Sally Clueless Processor couldn't place that "minimum value needed" order with any appraiser, the problem would be solved.

Yeah, I know. Not everyone is ethical, blah, blah, blah.

 

[Karl]

OMG!!! I'm agreeing with Mike S. to a degree. However am more in agreement with Bob I. & Otis & others. YES unfortunately we MAY have SOME that want to turn in C S things I am in hopes that those that forward complaints will SCRUTINIZE the complaints & make some logical judgements before sending things forward. Appraisal Boards get CS complaints & that slows em down for the truly needed complaints that need investigation IE used CR-1 Zoning when it should have been CR-3 Or FAILED to put in this is a Complete Summary Report.

"This is to important a topic thread to lock" Yes but this is too important a issue to be a "Witch Hunter" or "Crusader" This MUST stay with truly fraudulate work that has been actually proceesed. I don't believe (other than maybe lawyers involved) No ONE knows more than I how thankless & long process & how much research is needed to get ONE case to court. Or to get one settled prior to court time. Now there is frustration. Note the cases in R Dollars site note the DATES.

PLEASE be sure you have FACTS OF FRAUD prior to preceeding. That is for those sending to Pam & for Pam prior to putting her @$$ on the line. Cause those she's dealing with do NOT like to be made FOOLS of.

 

[Ms. Janet]

PLEASE be sure you have FACTS OF FRAUD prior to preceeding. .

yes karl................but that is not what they are requesting...................

i find it incredulous DOJ would sanction any database, much less a HUD database............... of anonymous addresses for targeting.

i have a question...........what else is in this database? how about homeowner names? maybe we can find a pattern in the names...........maybe most frauds are committed by a man named joe..........maybe we can do some backhanded ethnic profiling.............seems to me the posibilities are endless...............

 

[Chris Colston]

PLEASE be sure you have FACTS OF FRAUD prior to preceeding. That is for those sending to Pam & for Pam prior to putting her @$$ on the line. Cause those she's dealing with do NOT like to be made FOOLS of.

This has gotten somewhat blown all out of proportion. All Pam is asking for is addresses. No appraisers to be named, no MB or LO to be named, just addresses. Addresses where something doesn't look quite right, either the contract you have seems a bit fishy, or the contact information doesn't quite jive, maybe you have been requested to overlook the tenant as the occupant, or its an assignment that just has that smell that you think you should turn it down. She's not taking about the "value check" order or the assignment that says STOP blah, blah.

These addresses go into a data base that get "watched" by the QC departments and followed up on to see if in the fact the loan has a problem later on. They also get watched to see if a certain percentage are coming from certain brokers. Maybe, even to get these types of brokers shut down.

Nowhere, in this thread, has Pam asked for anything else. I know she can speak for herself, but I also know what she wants and it's not to become a vigilante or a female Don Quixote toting at windmills. There are real people (regulators, investigators and Quality control) at the other end of Pam's request, people she has personally met and talked to, some I have personally met. Some I have met at the Florida Quality Council meetings as speakers and participants.

 

[Scott Kibler]

Many lenders already target specific zip codes for addtional scruitny, this practice is just fine tuning the target.

Really who cares about the additional due dilligence? I for one have no fear of any file I work on being given the QC treatment, heck I pretty much assume they all are. I doubt if most people in here care if their reports get reviewed. I think the crusader fear for this concept is overblown.

 

[Annemieke Roell]

I have some thoughts on the issue of a value put on the order.

First of all, it is a feature of the software to put the "estimated value" on the order form. Perhaps it shouldn't be there. However, in case of a purchase transaction this becomes a moot point as we are required to report the purchase price on the URAR as well as an analysis of the purchase contract.

So we know what the "desired" value is.

As professionals, we should NOT be influenced by this. I know that there are unethical people out there and the appraisal world has its fair share. But there is also a level of "trustworthiness" required to be an appraiser and if one cannot be trusted to supress the urge to give in to "hitting a number" then I would suggest that one should not be in this profession.

And sure we can remove the "desired value" from the order form. But what prevents the LO to pick up the phone and convey this "desire" verbally?

 

[Renee Healion]

So what you're saying is the lenders already maintain these secret and probably proprietary databases and we would be just phoning into the tip line so to speak?

Zip codes--not census tracts. I get it.

 

[Chris Colston]

So what you're saying is the lenders already maintain these secret and probably proprietary databases and we would be just phoning into the tip line so to speak?

Zip codes--not census tracts. I get it.

Yup. The FUNDING lenders use MARI and other services like it (VEROS, to name another) to find already flagged addresses. These data bases contain credit bureau info, mortgage brokerage info, first payment default info, has the property been flipped or how many recent mortgages are placed at THAT address, etc. The address sent to Pam, that she then collects and sends to her contacts might already be in the system.