<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Comments Needed on Appraisal Requirement	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements</link>
	<description>Appraisal News and Tips for Real Estate Appraisers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 May 2019 03:59:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert Burkley		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24117</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Burkley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2018 19:40:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24117</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I  just posted my public comment to the OCC at  www.regulations.gov. Very easy.

Comment:

I own a small Residential Appraisal Business in Columbus, OH. Columbus is one of the fastest growing cities in the Midwest with home values fluctuating over the years. Currently the year over year Median &#038; Average Sales prices in the entire Central Ohio MLS are $215,000 and $181,000 respectively. Why do we need to raise the limits when a city like Columbus, OH average prices are not even at the $250,000 level. This increase can only help the banks and large AMC and not the consumer / Tax Payer. Why not use due diligence and not rush everything. All to save $100 when consumers are making the biggest investment in their lives and families lives. Raising the exemption from $250,000 $400,000 is a bad idea. See attached MLS data.

The idea of creating a hybrid appraisal product called an &quot;evaluation&quot; vs. &quot;appraisal&quot; is a bad idea. The proposed hybrid evaluation does not even require a licensed appraiser or certified appraiser. Who is doing the evaluation ? Who will this product benefit ? What is the big rush to increase the appraisal turn time from 5-7 business days to 24-48 hours. At least the real estate purchase contract may give the home buyer an out with the 3 day right if rescission ( Regulation Z ) if they determine the speedy &#038; cheap evaluation is not accurate.

Uploaded File(s)(Optional)

CBRMLS.pdf: success]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I  just posted my public comment to the OCC at  <a target="_blank" href="http://www.regulations.gov" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.regulations.gov</a>. Very easy.</p>
<p>Comment:</p>
<p>I own a small Residential Appraisal Business in Columbus, OH. Columbus is one of the fastest growing cities in the Midwest with home values fluctuating over the years. Currently the year over year Median &amp; Average Sales prices in the entire Central Ohio MLS are $215,000 and $181,000 respectively. Why do we need to raise the limits when a city like Columbus, OH average prices are not even at the $250,000 level. This increase can only help the banks and large AMC and not the consumer / Tax Payer. Why not use due diligence and not rush everything. All to save $100 when consumers are making the biggest investment in their lives and families lives. Raising the exemption from $250,000 $400,000 is a bad idea. See attached MLS data.</p>
<p>The idea of creating a hybrid appraisal product called an &#8220;evaluation&#8221; vs. &#8220;appraisal&#8221; is a bad idea. The proposed hybrid evaluation does not even require a licensed appraiser or certified appraiser. Who is doing the evaluation ? Who will this product benefit ? What is the big rush to increase the appraisal turn time from 5-7 business days to 24-48 hours. At least the real estate purchase contract may give the home buyer an out with the 3 day right if rescission ( Regulation Z ) if they determine the speedy &amp; cheap evaluation is not accurate.</p>
<p>Uploaded File(s)(Optional)</p>
<p>CBRMLS.pdf: success</p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24117" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert Burkley		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24113</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Burkley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2018 18:51:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24113</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: You may submit comments to the OCC by any of the methods set forth below. Commenters are encouraged to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or e-mail, if possible. 

Please use the title “Real Estate Appraisals” to facilitate the organization and distribution of the comments. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal—“Regulations.gov”: Go to www.regulations.gov. Enter “Docket ID OCC-2018-0038” in the Search Box and click “Search.” Click on “Comment Now” to submit public comments. 
• Click on the “Help” tab on the Regulations.gov home page to get information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for submitting public comments.
• E-mail: regs.comments@occ.treas.gov.
• Mail: Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street, SW., suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.
• Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th Street, SW., suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.
• Fax: (571) 465-4326.

Instructions: You must include “OCC” as the agency name and “Docket ID OCC-2018-0038” in your comment. In general, the OCC will enter all comments received into the docket and publish the comments on the Regulations.gov website without change, including any business or personal information that you provide such as name and address information, e-mail addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.

You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this rulemaking action by any of the following methods:
• Viewing Comments Electronically: Go to www.regulations.gov. Enter “Docket ID OCC-2018-0038” in the Search box and click “Search.” Click on “Open Docket Folder” on the right side of the screen. Comments and supporting materials can be viewed and filtered by clicking on “View all documents and comments in this docket” and then using the filtering tools on the left side of the screen. 

p.s. this is a public forum so do not include personal information.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: You may submit comments to the OCC by any of the methods set forth below. Commenters are encouraged to submit comments through the Federal eRulemaking Portal or e-mail, if possible. </p>
<p>Please use the title “Real Estate Appraisals” to facilitate the organization and distribution of the comments. You may submit comments by any of the following methods:</p>
<p>• Federal eRulemaking Portal—“Regulations.gov”: Go to <a target="_blank" href="http://www.regulations.gov" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.regulations.gov</a>. Enter “Docket ID OCC-2018-0038” in the Search Box and click “Search.” Click on “Comment Now” to submit public comments.<br />
• Click on the “Help” tab on the Regulations.gov home page to get information on using Regulations.gov, including instructions for submitting public comments.<br />
• E-mail: <a target="_blank" href="mailto:regs.comments@occ.treas.gov">regs.comments@occ.treas.gov</a>.<br />
• Mail: Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, 400 7th Street, SW., suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.<br />
• Hand Delivery/Courier: 400 7th Street, SW., suite 3E-218, Washington, DC 20219.<br />
• Fax: (571) 465-4326.</p>
<p>Instructions: You must include “OCC” as the agency name and “Docket ID OCC-2018-0038” in your comment. In general, the OCC will enter all comments received into the docket and publish the comments on the Regulations.gov website without change, including any business or personal information that you provide such as name and address information, e-mail addresses, or phone numbers. Comments received, including attachments and other supporting materials, are part of the public record and subject to public disclosure. Do not include any information in your comment or supporting materials that you consider confidential or inappropriate for public disclosure.</p>
<p>You may review comments and other related materials that pertain to this rulemaking action by any of the following methods:<br />
• Viewing Comments Electronically: Go to <a target="_blank" href="http://www.regulations.gov" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.regulations.gov</a>. Enter “Docket ID OCC-2018-0038” in the Search box and click “Search.” Click on “Open Docket Folder” on the right side of the screen. Comments and supporting materials can be viewed and filtered by clicking on “View all documents and comments in this docket” and then using the filtering tools on the left side of the screen. </p>
<p>p.s. this is a public forum so do not include personal information.</p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24113" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Baggins		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24078</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Baggins]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2018 16:02:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24078</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24074&quot;&gt;Robert Burkley&lt;/a&gt;.

&quot;The government&quot;, a misnomer in this instance.  The lenders write their own regulations in a revolving door system.  Lenders have never been and will never be keen to additional checks and balances.  Those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it.  Problems with lenders and money changers were one of the cornerstones for the American Revolution.  Same old tricks, different day.  The real problem is the general public actually trusts these organizations.  We&#039;re living in the last days of failing consumer protection as the public continues to excercize institutional memory and prioritizes debt over personal financial security.  These protections being eliminated now had previously grew up around a different public mindset...  What&#039;s in your wallet?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a target="_blank" href="https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24074">Robert Burkley</a>.</p>
<p>&#8220;The government&#8221;, a misnomer in this instance.  The lenders write their own regulations in a revolving door system.  Lenders have never been and will never be keen to additional checks and balances.  Those who do not know history are condemned to repeat it.  Problems with lenders and money changers were one of the cornerstones for the American Revolution.  Same old tricks, different day.  The real problem is the general public actually trusts these organizations.  We&#8217;re living in the last days of failing consumer protection as the public continues to excercize institutional memory and prioritizes debt over personal financial security.  These protections being eliminated now had previously grew up around a different public mindset&#8230;  What&#8217;s in your wallet?</p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24078" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert Burkley		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24074</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Burkley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2018 23:46:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24074</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[REALLY!! Who does this benefit?? Not the consumer!! ONLY Banks &#038; a few big AMC&#039;s pushing the issue.

I believe the general public values the Appraisal Industry. We get requests from the public for many reasons, tax appeal, estate planning, what to list a property for FSBO, fair market for divorce, etc........ Do you think the public would be willing to replace the traditional appraisal (same appraiser inspects the property, researches the market and provides a value with reconciliatio ) all to save $100 for a &quot;evaluation&quot;.

I can&#039;t believe the government will approve this..........uggggh.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>REALLY!! Who does this benefit?? Not the consumer!! ONLY Banks &amp; a few big AMC&#8217;s pushing the issue.</p>
<p>I believe the general public values the Appraisal Industry. We get requests from the public for many reasons, tax appeal, estate planning, what to list a property for FSBO, fair market for divorce, etc&#8230;&#8230;.. Do you think the public would be willing to replace the traditional appraisal (same appraiser inspects the property, researches the market and provides a value with reconciliatio ) all to save $100 for a &#8220;evaluation&#8221;.</p>
<p>I can&#8217;t believe the government will approve this&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.uggggh.</p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24074" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Robert Burkley		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24072</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Robert Burkley]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2018 20:59:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24072</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[If they want cheap and fast reduce our reporting requirements / guidelines / we can produce a &quot;short form&quot;. It will be a better product then &quot;zillow&quot; !!!  Hope Freddie / Fannie get this new form right ! Reduce liability and the 7 year file storage requirement for the appraiser.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If they want cheap and fast reduce our reporting requirements / guidelines / we can produce a &#8220;short form&#8221;. It will be a better product then &#8220;zillow&#8221; !!!  Hope Freddie / Fannie get this new form right ! Reduce liability and the 7 year file storage requirement for the appraiser.</p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24072" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: chris		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24068</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[chris]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2018 17:27:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24068</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Here we go again !!!]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here we go again !!!</p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24068" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Dan Wilson		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24067</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dan Wilson]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:40:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24067</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[All loans should require 3rd party appraisals to ensure that the borrower is also protected. I for one have done many appraisals that did not make value. Now the borrower stops paying for the loan and now who is going to pay the debt? Not me again?! 


As for the lack of appraiser, there is not a lack of them it is that we want a fair fee and the time to complete a credible report.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All loans should require 3rd party appraisals to ensure that the borrower is also protected. I for one have done many appraisals that did not make value. Now the borrower stops paying for the loan and now who is going to pay the debt? Not me again?! </p>
<p>As for the lack of appraiser, there is not a lack of them it is that we want a fair fee and the time to complete a credible report.</p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24067" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Baggins		</title>
		<link>https://appraisersblogs.com/proposed-rule-2-amend-appraisal-requirements/#comment-24066</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Baggins]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2018 14:20:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appraisersblogs.com/?p=20363#comment-24066</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Thank you for posting this. Of high importance that appraisers contribute with a letter of some sort. Talking points? Share your letter for copying? I&#039;ll use the paper mail option most likely and will try and review other comments first. 

&lt;p style=&quot;text-align: left;&quot;&gt;Paper mail address per directions
Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E–218
Washington, DC 20219
or
regulations.gov then search Docket ID OCC–2018–0038&lt;/p&gt;

Here is the stated location from the register notice, to review comments electronically: &lt;a 0=&quot;0=&quot;href=https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&amp;po=0&amp;dct=PS&amp;D=OCC-2018-0038&amp;refD=OCC-2018-0038-0001&quot;&quot;&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;View All Comments&lt;/a&gt;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for posting this. Of high importance that appraisers contribute with a letter of some sort. Talking points? Share your letter for copying? I&#8217;ll use the paper mail option most likely and will try and review other comments first. </p>
<p style="text-align: left;">Paper mail address per directions<br />
Legislative and Regulatory Activities Division<br />
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency<br />
400 7th Street SW, Suite 3E–218<br />
Washington, DC 20219<br />
or<br />
regulations.gov then search Docket ID OCC–2018–0038</p>
<p>Here is the stated location from the register notice, to review comments electronically: <a target="_blank" 0="0="href=https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&#038;po=0&#038;dct=PS&#038;D=OCC-2018-0038&#038;refD=OCC-2018-0038-0001""" rel="nofollow">View All Comments</a></p>
<div class="cld-like-dislike-wrap cld-template-4">
    <div class="cld-like-wrap  cld-common-wrap">
    <a href="javascript:void(0)" class="cld-like-trigger cld-like-dislike-trigger  " title="" data-comment-id="24066" data-trigger-type="like" data-restriction="cookie" data-already-liked="0">
                        <i class="far fa-smile"></i>
                    </a>
    <span class="cld-like-count-wrap cld-count-wrap">    </span>
</div></div>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
