As long as you are truthful in your comments and can back up what you state, you have nothing to worry about.

Be very careful of any comments to Verdi re Clarocity. Don’t get yourselves sued.

We have a legitimate interest as taxpayers in asking USDA what the heck they were thinking, and inquiring as to how they were selected. Also, whether their past reputation with appraisers was considered. Is USDA aware they are a Canadian company whose stock (in the past) could not even be offered for sale legally in the USA?

As concerned appraisers, our interest is also legitimate in assuring USDA is dealing through someone that both the government and appraisers believe is trustworthy and competent. I’d be very careful about offering any direct personal views that aren’t factually objective.

My guess is verde consulting is Clarocity reinvented. I hope to get a request to sign up with the other AMC thats suppose to be the only other one the USDA is working with

info@verdiconsulting.net

When dealing with appraisal related content, who has the time?

If it was a public bid like HUD REO MM contractors, the government agency will have just checked for compliance with registration standards and then skipped to the bidding number. If there are any compliance standards for recognition of reg z and fair appraiser billing, that’s easy to skip past as well. Because after 10 years of highly aggressive operations, amc’s have never been given an honest national audit of cost of service differences, they’re simply not worried about it.

That’s what’s really great about amc’s as far as government is concerned. They do it cheaper and faster. Or so they claim. I’ve never had usda work, not sure how that works.

You guys, everyone should sign up. For the primary purpose of documenting the abuse and forwarding the requests to the usda heads.

Unlike mortgage lending conventional, it may be somewhat more difficult to conceal the clients name during the bidding and undercutting the appraisers fee process. Signing up and accepting orders are two entirely different actions. If you actually want to see the client return one day, you should be on that mailing list.

My crystal ball is glowing. They’ll hit the ground running and will not have a clue what a fair fee for this work should be. They’ll test everyone on panel for discount fees and within a month or two will redirect the majority of all work orders to the few absolute lowest bidders. Cost savings from reduced price of appraisal service will not be returned to borrowing consumers.

The pertinent question remains the same. What was the client charged for this service. If an appraiser can not get an answer to that question they should refuse service. I’ve asked that for so many years, I’ll tell you my fee if you tell me yours first. I’ve attained the information from low level people sometimes, often learning they charge variable fees based on negotiations with individual clients. When working with amc’s, the appraiser is the customer. You can’t get around it.

Ditto

Same thing happened to me. Like I said SAD!

This is unbelievable. In addition to writing to the USDA Administrators Office it’s going to take writing to House Financial Services Committee and others as well. Why on earth would any government agency contract with a company whose stocks and securities cannot even legally be offered for sale in the USA?

Especially a company with as tarnished a reputation as Clarocity?