Many lenders only require the basic FNMA standard product, several inbetweeners (AMC’s) increase the criteria, and don’t inform the appraiser until he delivers the report.

Increasing the number of comps, asking the appraiser to grid the active listings, asking why other comps were not used, is beyond the scope and should be charged for. The reviewer is inadequate, and does not understand that gridding the active listings leads to misrepresenting the values. As all Appraisers, and agents understand active listings are the most actively changed item in the MLS. Frequently the active are changed 5 or more times, for both good and bad reasons. Market times are not measured from the highest list price only from the most reasonable or nearest the sale listing. The appraiser should include that the values are finale at the delivery, and fees earned.

IF I were ever asked to pay any added costs or fees I would raise my rates to that client and let them know the exact reason for the increase.

These are the same companies that have been lying to Congress about appraisers being responsible for higher fees. These fees are for service costs MANDATED by the GSEs and to meet MISMO developed UCDP requirements.

wontobey has a good point. Why are appraisers asked to cut their price so the lenders can employ AMC’s? Now AMC’s have us pay to upload the reports (technology fee). Sounds like both of these should be their cost of doing business. What’s next? Are they going to deduct the cost of review from us? Why not charge us for their lights and heat?

When these folks suggest a shortage of appraisers, they really mean a shortage of appraisers that will work for nothing!

Jim

Amen! You got it!

Coupled with the other great “appraisal innovation” gurus over at Clarocity, Zaio, and Sausage-Plus, AMCs have (or should have) ZERO credibility. They have proven themselves to be greedy, incompetent, dishonest parasites.

ANY legislator, bureaucrat or regulator that cites them as being credible, is a damned fool. No exceptions.

Steve, the amc fee should not be added to the appraisal report. The fee of any AMC is the LENDER’S COST to do business, NOT the appraiser (by cutting the fee paid to the appraiser and keeping the rest) nor the borrower (by passing the AMC fee on to them at closing and hiding it in the “Appraisal Fee”).

And those states (which are not many) that do require appraisers to disclose their fee somewhere in the report or say the AMC cannot prohibit the appraiser from disclosing the appraisal fee (again somewhere in the report), don’t say anything about AMC prohibiting appraisers from including an INVOICE in the report or portals stripping the invoice from the report.

Several years ago I decided no more amc work. You know why? Because none agreed to my invoice in my appraisal report. NOT ONE!

I don’t like doing business or want to associate with crooks!

Call that, and raise. Your move.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racketeer_Influenced_and_Corrupt_Organizations_Act

Requesting the updated FNMA forms have standard data entry lines for total appraisal fee distribution breakdown, as well as total outsourced services third party assistance identification to include individual and company names alike, complete with addresses, dates, services performed, total distribution of all costs and per diem expenses. Citizens should expect basic dignity in lending like not being price gouged along the way or dealing with illusions of quality service when the majority of duties they paid to have completed were actually completed through outsourcing. If appraisers have those old order fax requests which routinely showed the consumers billed amount, please scan them to digital and post them for younger appraisers edification. We’re only asking for transparency in costs, something which used to be an industry standard.

The banks don’t want the appraiser’s invoice because they may actually pay both invoices since the AMC adds their own invoice to the appraisal. I’ve seen it happen several times, returned the money of course because that’s law for incorrect payment of money.

I don’t think consumer is going to care one bit about the appraiser’s invoice because they don’t have to pay it by the time they see it.

And forget about using it to gather payment from AMC. Individual invoices to AMC are useless. If an AMC requires you to send them an invoice or statement or anything else in order to be paid then stop doing work for them. It’s a trick they use in case they want to delay the payment; they can just tell you the statement must not have been received and therefore it couldn’t be paid. At least stop after the first sad story excuse they give for not paying you though.

Back to the subject though. New Mexico requires the appraiser’s fee and the AMCs retained fee to be included in the report. Other states require just the appraiser’s fee or say the appraiser can’t be prohibited from including their fee in the report. Google the AMC rules by state to find out more.

If what you say is true Steve, then what is the objective for AMCs to ask appraisers NOT to include an invoice in their appraisal report, or to use portals that strips the invoice from the report?

How can a consumer even begin to say whether they care or not when they are being deprived of this information?

You also say many states have had similar rules for years. Can you list those states?

@Bill, this bill also states that ONLY appraisers can do inspections for bifurcated appraisals. This law is a big deal!

I agree with you, it is mostly meaningless. It’s not a new idea as many states have had similar rules in place for years now which have done nothing to help consumers or appraisers.

Agreed !!!

I strongly believe that appraisers who work for AMCs have experienced a RESTRAINT OF TRADE situation while banks lobby to rid the mortgage market of pesky independent and professional appraisers.

I want to know all the efforts of the AI in states that pushes for the “evaluation platform” mentioned above. After I follow up I intend upon writing the AI because it that and the AMC model are the antithesis of what we are taught and trained to do in our work. At risk is our credibility and our livelihoods. Unfortunately, we are all barely able to continue our practices and working for an AMC is like working for a pimp with no real knowledge of the work or contribution to the safety of our banks; the banks appear to be engineering another bailout when they took the American middle-class’s taxpayer money and profited while still using tactics that will be the demise of our profession. Now we have the degradation of HUD and CFPB because the heads of those offices are held by people meant to destroy former consumer protections. What are we to do? We need a strong union! What other profession has such restraints of trade? Certainly Wall Street will continue to act with reckless regard to the safety of our financial institutions if allowed to perpetuate the myth that appraisers are responsible for bank bailouts!

So amcs doing business in NY can no longer gouge the consumers, AND appraisers who did not include invoices in their report per the amcs instructions, can no longer intentionally and knowingly help in overcharging consumers!

As far as I’m concerned this as a huge win for the consumers and should become law in all states!

I agree !!