PIW’s Get National Attention
36 32 15
…“a race to the bottom” between the two companies in pushing for more appraisal-free loans
Ken Harney, a friend of the appraisal community has written an article about Fannie and Freddie waiving appraisals. The article will be seen by consumers throughout the country. VaCAP encourages everyone reading this to share Ken’s article on all your social media outlets, your websites, blogs, etc. See the article here.
For homeowners and buyers, appraisal-free loans have offered an unexpected windfall: relief from having to pay between $400 and $600 for the service…
Fannie’s and Freddie’s no-appraisal option has been popular with lenders… The company is now doing more than 10 percent of its home-purchase loans appraisal-free…
Pat Turner, a Richmond, Va., appraiser, says worse yet, “savings” from Fannie and Freddie may not always flow to buyers. He cited a recent case in the Richmond area where a major online lender allegedly charged a buyer $600 at settlement on a loan with an appraisal-free waiver…
In other News:
Bloomberg reports on April 27, 2018 in an article by Christopher Maloney, Fannie and Freddie join forces for a “RACE TO THE BOTTOM”
Investors may see a “race to the bottom” in loan quality because of their inability to price in prepayment speed differentials in the so-called to-be-announced market. Consequently, the UMBS TBA will favor the worst performing loans, as they are the “cheapest to deliver,” according to Schmidt. That could hurt lenders, investors and borrowers.”
See the article titled New Mortgage Bonds May Prove Double-Edged Sword for Investors here.
Are you an employee or independent contractor?
Peter Christensen published an article on Appraiser Law Blog concerning a a ruling by a California Court. The article is very telling and a positive for many appraisers. Many AMCs may find themselves at the receiving end of some very large class action suits from appraisers. because of this ruling. Well worth the read. Please share on all your social media accounts.
To prove the key point that the company’s vendor panelists should be classified as employees, rather than contractors, plaintiff’s counsel offered evidence that the company “tells vendors where to go, when to go, what to do, when to get it done and how much and when they will be paid for their efforts.”