Comments on: Legislative Call to Action

By: Baggins

Baggins — Thu, 08 Feb 2018 17:02:02 +0000

In reply to Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor®.

Please enlighten me. If it had no impact, and was voted yes, what justification was there for the strike down? The language could not have been more simple and acceptable.

http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?181+oth+SB655F122+PDF

By: Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor®

Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor® — Tue, 06 Feb 2018 20:47:29 +0000

In reply to AppraisersBlogs Team.

Interesting.

More time spent on muscadine grapes than on the AMC issues…which by the way was slightly misrepresented. Patron or speaker is clearly a tool of the AMCs with his ‘increased costs to consumers’ if AMCs were not to be certified in Virginia (out of alignment with fed AMC requirements…which struck me as a giant Pinocchio)

By: Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor®

Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor® — Tue, 06 Feb 2018 20:36:16 +0000

In reply to Marion.

Meaning the whole thing was the legislative equivalent of a pat on the fanny, coupled with a “don’t worry about a thing kid, we gotcha covered?”

By: AppraisersBlogs Team

AppraisersBlogs Team — Tue, 06 Feb 2018 16:30:55 +0000

In reply to Jack.

SB 979, start watching at 1 hour 50 minutes

http://virginia-senate.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=2054

By: Marion

Marion — Tue, 06 Feb 2018 04:31:07 +0000

SB 655 Appraisal management companies; cap on fees, disclosure.

02/05/18 Senate: Stricken at request of Patron in General Laws and Technology (11-Y 1-N)

YEAS–Ruff, Barker, Vogel, Black, Reeves, Wexton, DeSteph, McPike, Suetterlein, Dunnavant, Mason–11.

NAYS–Surovell–1.

ABSTENTIONS–0.
http://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?181+vot+S12V0088+SB0655

By: Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor®

Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor® — Mon, 05 Feb 2018 20:29:34 +0000

In reply to Advocate.

My bet would be on the very big boys; like title companies that own AMCs and companies like First American in promotion of their NEW PACE PRO product compliments of their subsidiary ACI.

Advocate, WHY would you settle for peanuts and escrowed funds? Do you WANT to give someone else the use of YOUR money for 30-60 days? Do you WANT to now let payment of professional fees become conditional upon the client liking the results?

AMCS collect the money before they place the order with you. There is NO reason full payment should not be made to you upon acceptance of the order; or at least no later than the date of inspection. You see the property and there are no surprises, you collect the fee. You see the property and now it turns out its complex; you renegotiate and collect the fee, or drop the assignment.

People, PLEASE stop accepting half assed solutions as “better than nothing”. BTW – how many C&R fee cases has Virginia prosecuted to date and imposed fines on?

By: Advocate

Advocate — Mon, 05 Feb 2018 15:24:23 +0000

In reply to Jack.

Follow this link. It will also provide a link to the House side as well.

http://virginia-senate.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=3

By: Baggins

Baggins — Mon, 05 Feb 2018 15:18:53 +0000

Stop the amc corporate lobbyists? Good luck. They buy who they want. A small group of power hungry individuals hijacked the earnings of a hundred thousand professional laborers. They are not content and want the other half as well.

By: AppraisersBlogs Team

AppraisersBlogs Team — Sun, 04 Feb 2018 15:58:13 +0000

In reply to Seneca.

Mike Ford share his views regarding these bills

https://appraisersblogs.com/AGA-views-evaluation-caps-amc-VA-bills

By: Advocate

Advocate — Sat, 03 Feb 2018 23:52:58 +0000

The bills introduced do not seem to be coming from an appraiser. Most likely REVVA, or perhaps a consumer who has complained about abusive practices by amcs to their delegate. Virginia is one of the aggressive states with amc legislation. It seems each year more and more is happening there. I really like the escrowing of appraisal funds. Every other aspect of real estate transactions must hold consumer funds in an escrow account. We all know what happened when TCV closed; their bonds were cancelled. Appraisers did receive something, but not the full amount owed. Escrowing makes much more sense than having bonds . Hopefully Vacap can get this turned around and input into the bill.

By: Kris

Kris — Sat, 03 Feb 2018 21:13:43 +0000

I think it’s important to note that this legislation will effect consumers, AMC’s and appraiser in Virginia. It is important to watch what other states are doing because many States look at what other States are doing or have done when writing or passing new legislation. Thank for the heads up!

By: Jack

Jack — Sat, 03 Feb 2018 21:09:08 +0000

Is there any way these hearings can be viewed online live? Side note: Thanks Mike for your prior response regarding appraisers accepted lower fees. Very informative.

By: Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor®

Mike Ford, AGA, GAA, RAA, SCREA, Realtor® — Sat, 03 Feb 2018 18:28:38 +0000

I sent AB views on each. We don’t support continued bad legislation. 655 appears beneficial BUT requires modification imho. 979/1506 just don’t seem as offensive as implied above. More important issues are left unaddressed. Missed opportunities.

By: Seneca

Seneca — Sat, 03 Feb 2018 17:22:11 +0000

So, which ones are good and which ones are bad?

By: Vincent Ralph Simon on Facebook

Vincent Ralph Simon on Facebook — Sat, 03 Feb 2018 16:02:57 +0000

And yet they complain if you have an apprentice who is completely trained to inspect alone.

By: John B. Cox on Facebook

John B. Cox on Facebook — Sat, 03 Feb 2018 14:03:01 +0000

“Government isn’t the solution to our problems. Government is the problem”
Ronald Reagan