It’s Time to Take Out the Junk: AMC Practices Exposed
“Evil AMCs thrive not only through active malice, but also through the silence and inaction of those appraisers who could intervene.” — Edmund Burke… if he had been an appraiser
It’s a conversation we’ve all had before:
“I’ve already got all my information entered. I’m used to the system. I don’t want to learn a new process. I guess I’ll just keep paying the extra couple of dollars every month so I don’t have to deal with it.”
This applies to technology, finances, personal property – or what it usually gets called eventually: junk.
Days turn into weeks. Weeks turn into years. Before long, you find yourself mindlessly paying for something – or staring at something – only because it has become part of the routine and landscape of your life.
You still have a rotary-dial telephone in the living room because that’s where it has always been. You refuse to throw away the basket of cords because someday you might need a 25-foot coaxial cable. You hold on to that Big Bad Voodoo Daddy record because one day swing music is going to make a huge comeback.
In life – and certainly in appraising – it’s important to recognize when things are at the end of their useful lives.
That brings us to another conversation appraisers have all had:
Why am I handing over a significant portion of the fee for this assignment to a company that appears to have done very little to earn it?
Or, put another way:
I challenge you to identify another profession in which the administrative middleman routinely receives compensation equal to – or even greater than – the licensed professional who performs the work, assumes the risk, signs the report, and remains accountable for its conclusions.
I’m guessing you know where I’m going with this.
Who Actually Performs the Appraisal?
One of the best ways to demonstrate the absurdity of a situation is to explain it in the most basic terms.
At a minimum, the appraiser:
- Assumes the risk of starting and operating the business
- Obtains the required education and experience
- Finds a supervisory appraiser willing to train them
- Completes the apprenticeship and experience requirements
- Invests substantial time and money in the profession
- Passes the applicable licensing or certification examinations
- Applies to and remains accountable to the state regulatory agency
- Complies with USPAP, federal requirements, state law, and client guidelines
- Purchases professional liability insurance
- Pays for appraisal software, data services, equipment, continuing education, licensing, and other operating expenses
- Inspects and analyzes the property
- Researches and verifies the market data
- Develops and communicates the appraisal
- Signs the report and accepts professional responsibility for it
Once all that is finished, congratulations – you are finally qualified to begin your career.
P.S. If you do your job well, exercise independent judgment, and refuse to become a number-hitter, you will probably lose clients eventually.
Against that background, it is past time to highlight what portion of the consumer’s appraisal fee actually compensates the appraiser – and what portion compensates the company administering the order.
This is not an argument that administrative work has no value. It does. Order processing, panel administration, communication, compliance monitoring, technology, payment processing, and quality-control functions all require time and resources.
The question is whether the compensation retained for those services bears a reasonable relationship to the services actually performed – particularly when the appraiser provides the licensed professional analysis, bears the operational expenses, assumes the assignment risk, and remains responsible for USPAP compliance.
How Did We Get Here?
When I left commercial real estate and followed the path of the independent residential appraiser, the profession seemed filled with renewed hope and opportunity.
After the mortgage crisis, new safeguards were promoted as a way to restore trust among consumers, lenders, government-sponsored enterprises, mortgage professionals, and appraisers. Appraiser independence was a legitimate concern. Loan-production personnel should not be permitted to select an appraiser based on a desired value, threaten an appraiser’s livelihood, or condition future work on “making the deal.”
That part should not be controversial.
The Home Valuation Code of Conduct, commonly known as HVCC, took effect in 2009 for certain loans delivered to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. It restricted the ability of loan-production personnel to select, retain, recommend, or influence appraisers.
HVCC did not, however, enact a federal requirement that every lender use an appraisal management company. It also did not prohibit every form of communication between a lender and an appraiser. Properly separated personnel could communicate for legitimate purposes, including obtaining status updates, correcting factual errors, or requesting additional support.
Nevertheless, the practical effect of HVCC was a substantial increase in lenders’ use of AMCs. A 2011 report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office concluded that several factors – including HVCC – had increased the use of appraisal management companies. The AMC offered lenders an administratively convenient way to create separation between loan production and the appraisal function. (GAO report)
That convenience eventually became market power.
In 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act established broader federal appraisal-independence requirements. Those requirements are now reflected in 15 U.S.C. § 1639e and implemented through 12 C.F.R. § 1026.42.
The law prohibits conduct such as compensation, coercion, extortion, bribery, or other actions intended to cause an appraised value to be based on something other than the appraiser’s independent professional judgment.
Again, none of that requires the universal use of an AMC.
Dodd-Frank also directed federal agencies to establish minimum requirements for appraisal management companies. Under 12 U.S.C. § 3353, covered AMCs are subject to registration and supervision requirements and must have systems designed to ensure, among other things, that appraisals are performed by properly credentialed appraisers, that appraisals comply with USPAP, and that assignments are conducted independently and without inappropriate influence or coercion.
On paper, this sounds reasonable.
In practice, however, it helped transform the AMC from an optional administrative service into an entity that could market itself as a compliance shield, quality-control department, assignment gatekeeper, and necessary intermediary between lenders and appraisers.
That shift fundamentally altered the balance of power.
The Gatekeeper Becomes the Industry
The problem is not the existence of appraisal management companies.
The problem is an industry structure that allows large AMCs – particularly those employing or affiliating with their own appraisers – to influence assignment distribution, appraiser compensation, turnaround expectations, review standards, and production volume while simultaneously presenting themselves as neutral protectors of appraiser independence.
The appearance of a conflict should be obvious.
An AMC may decide which independent appraiser receives an assignment, determine the offered fee, impose the deadline, control the revision process, evaluate the appraiser’s performance, and decide whether that appraiser receives future work. If that same company also benefits economically from work completed by its own staff or affiliated appraisers, legitimate questions arise:
- How are assignments allocated?
- Are independent appraisers competing on equal terms?
- Does the lowest fee or fastest turnaround receive priority over competency?
- Can an appraiser disagree with a reviewer without risking future assignments?
- Is “quality control” being used to improve reports, or to pressure appraisers into satisfying production expectations?
- How much of the amount charged to the consumer reaches the person who actually performs and signs the appraisal?
- Who benefits when the AMC’s retained fee exceeds the appraiser’s fee?
Those are not attacks on appraiser independence, they’re legitimate questions that need to be asked.
They are questions necessary to preserve it.
The Courts Are Beginning to Hear Some of Those Questions
Several recently filed lawsuits have placed AMC compensation, fee disclosures, and employment practices under public scrutiny.
In Arnold v. Appraisal Nation, LLC, AMC Links, LLC, and United Wholesale Mortgage, LLC, No. CACE-25-019181, filed in Florida state court, the plaintiffs allege deceptive and unfair practices involving appraisal-related fees charged to borrowers.
In Bernholtz v. CrossCountry Mortgage, LLC, et al., No. 0:26-cv-61978, filed in the Southern District of Florida, the plaintiffs have raised similar concerns involving appraisal charges and the division of fees between AMCs and appraisers. (Federal docket information)
A separate federal case filed in Georgia, Golar v. Class Valuation, LLC, reportedly challenges compensation and overtime practices affecting staff appraisers under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
These lawsuits do not establish that the allegations are true. No final determination of liability has been made, and the defendants are entitled to respond to the allegations in court. The practices described in these filings mirror concerns appraisers have raised for years.
However, one aspect of the Florida cases deserves particular attention: the AMCs are not the only defendants. The mortgage lenders are named as well.
That distinction matters.
Many lenders justify their continued reliance on AMCs by describing the relationship as an outsourcing of appraisal compliance and liability. The lender pays an intermediary to administer the process, monitor compliance, and create distance between loan production and the appraiser. The implication is that the AMC assumes the associated risk and provides the lender with a layer of protection.
These cases demonstrate why that assumption should be, at the least, questioned.
The mere use of an AMC does not prevent a lender from being accused of participating in, benefiting from, or bearing responsibility for the appraisal-related practices challenged by a borrower. An AMC may perform compliance and administrative functions, but it does not create an impenetrable legal firewall around the lender. Federal law reinforces this point. Under FIRREA and the Interagency Appraisal and Evaluation Guidelines, the lender is ultimately responsible for the appraisal program, the selection of qualified appraisers, the oversight of any agent performing valuation management functions, and the compliance of the appraisal itself. Dodd Frank treats AMCs as agents of the lender, not replacements for lender liability. Outsourcing administrative tasks does not transfer responsibility. The lender remains accountable for ensuring USPAP compliance, appraiser independence, and the adequacy of the valuation used for the transaction.
To be clear, naming a lender as a defendant does not prove that the lender is liable. These remain allegations, and the courts have not made final determinations on their merits. Nevertheless, the cases show that outsourcing the appraisal function does not necessarily outsource the lender’s exposure along with it.
If anything, the use of an intermediary may create another layer of conduct for the lender to monitor. A lender that delegates appraisal administration may still face questions concerning the AMC it selected, the fee structures it permitted, the disclosures provided to borrowers, and the practices from which it allegedly benefited.
The lawsuits therefore place practices that appraisers have questioned for years – fee transparency, compensation structures, employment classifications, production expectations, and the relationships among lenders, AMCs, appraisers, and consumers – directly before the courts.
They also challenge one of the central selling points of the modern AMC model: that inserting a large intermediary between the lender and appraiser necessarily reduces risk and protects the consumer.
If the intermediary does not insulate the lender from being brought into litigation – and its compensation structure, employment practices, or fee disclosures create additional sources of risk – the industry is entitled to ask whether the promised compliance shield provides the protection lenders believe they are purchasing.
Not Every AMC Is the Problem
In the interest of fairness, some AMCs perform the role they were retained to perform.
They pay reasonable and customary fees. They select appraisers based on competency rather than price alone. They employ reviewers who understand USPAP and the difference between a legitimate correction and an attempt to direct an appraisal result. They communicate professionally, respect appraiser independence, and provide a useful service to both lenders and appraisers. The problem is that these AMCs appear to be a very small exception, not the rule. If you ask any appraiser, they can name you the worst violators out there.
This next part is probably going to ruffle some feathers.
The issue is the companies that have taken a legitimate administrative model and distorted it into a system that extracts excessive fees, suppresses appraiser compensation, prioritizes speed and volume over competency, or uses control over future assignments to discourage independent professional judgment.
Another part of the distortion involves AMCs that employ staff appraisers while also controlling the assignment flow to independent appraisers. Federal law already prohibits an AMC from being more than 20 percent owned by an appraiser or appraisal firm, precisely because of the conflict created when the entity managing the panel also benefits from its own appraisal production. When an AMC bids out assignments to independents while simultaneously feeding work to its internal staff, the independent appraiser is not competing on equal terms. The company that controls the distribution of orders, the offered fee, the turnaround expectations and the future work pipeline should not also be performing appraisals for profit. That structure creates an inherent conflict and places independent firms at a disadvantage they cannot realistically overcome.
Every profession is eventually judged by its worst examples. Unfortunately, every damaging headline involving an appraisal or an appraisal management company reflects upon the appraisal profession as a whole – even when the licensed appraiser had no control over the business practices that produced the controversy.
I have seen some of those practices firsthand.
Like many of you, I am tired of remaining silent. One only needs to speak to an appraiser in the wild, check LinkedIn, or read a blog post to know that the issue with the modern AMC model is one that all appraisers agree on. And you know reaching a unanimous conclusion from a group of appraisers is a statistical impossibility.
But what we cannot do is have a civil war amongst ourselves. A house divided cannot stand. I know appraisers who have never worked for an AMC and refuse to do so. I know appraisers who are currently employed as staff appraisers because they have no other choices, and while we may have opinions on either there is no benefit from infighting that this issue appears to cause.
I love this profession. I love talking to appraisers. Of course, we know we provide a necessary and beneficial public service. But historically we haven’t been the best at convincing others of that fact. And that’s why it’s necessary to highlight these issues to the public at large because if we’re being honest, making this issue about how the appraiser has been continually stepped on and taken advantage of probably will not move the needle in the way it needs to. The Bernholtz v. Cross Country lawsuit illustrates what we all know but nobody else does and speaks louder than I can. It isn’t just the appraiser who is being stolen from. But every consumer who has been subjected to this model.
Sunlight
They say sunlight is the best disinfectant.
Over the next few days, weeks, months – or however long it takes – I intend to highlight specific practices that I believe have contributed to the degradation of public trust in the appraisal profession, including the practices that have quietly shaped the modern AMC model.
The name Appraisal Management Company creates the impression that the company is an official or indispensable part of the appraisal process. But standing beside a picture of a million dollars makes me no more of a millionaire than placing the word appraisal in a company’s name and calling itself an appraiser.
Appraisers should be offended when our profession is damaged by conduct we did not authorize, do not control, and may be financially punished for questioning.
But indignation by itself changes nothing.
For every ten stories I have personally witnessed, I suspect thousands more have never been told. If you have experienced conduct that you believe was unethical, coercive, deceptive, or inconsistent with applicable law, document it. Preserve the emails, engagement letters, fee disclosures, revision requests, payment records, and assignment histories.
When appropriate, report potential violations to the applicable state regulatory agency or other authorities. If you would rather remain anonymous, reach out to me. I will protect your identity and, where possible, help bring the conduct into the light. The HOW part of the equation is not as important as the result. Get these issues out there in public.
The current mega-AMC model – especially one that permits a company to control independent appraisal assignments while simultaneously benefiting from its own appraisal production – needs to be abolished.
The lawsuits speak loudly.
It needs to be reformed. Portions of it need to be prohibited, … or … Either way, it is time for everyone to stop staring at the basket of cords.
AMC’s cannot survive without Appraisers. Appraisers can survive without AMC’s. It’s time to remind people of this fact, and it’s time to get rid of the junk.
- It’s Time to Take Out the Junk: AMC Practices Exposed - August 21, 2026
So many stories, still no changes.
https://appraisersblogs.com/systemic-failures-in-fha-appraisal-n-loan-review/
I couldn’t agree more. And I promise you thats not how I roll. The issue has always been that nobody cares about this stuff but us appraisers and nobody would listen. This becoming about the consumer and how its not only Appraisers that the AMC’s have been harming, changes the game. People are starting to listen. If you want to get involved reach out to me.
Veteran home property purchased, believing the county record true, or at least fairly reliable. It wasn’t, and a number of the locals (including the appraiser), knew it, or should have.
The “home” was/is a manufactured structure built by Fleetwood Homes (prior to CAVCO), and the property it was set and declared upon was owned at the time by a manufactured home retailer, who made a ton of money for the county, and his corner-cutting, was often ignored (we learned after the fact).
The “home” was never legal. It was wrecked in original transit. HUD Certification ordered removed. Veteran was never informed of this.
Appraiser briefly noted no exterior Labels/tags, but finished the appraisal and gave it the “go” to the lender and the VA. He was required to stop his work until the HUD issue was resolved. He didn’t.
The veteran discovered the fraud in the paperwork years after the closing after seeking a simple HELOC and the paperwork was lining up. So, veteran’s equity and finance ability and insuring ability and market ability all went down the tubes, while his “mortgage” payment increased. Veteran had filed a lawsuit (the appraiser settled out of court); the insurer matter is still in the supreme court (Idaho) as is a second case (associated to the first) of the lawyer veteran hired to file the insurer case, and when the lawyer abandoned just prior to arbitration to be scheduled. Veteran is told this is likely the first case of this specific footprint of mortgage fraud.
Well said Logan! Thank you for helping shed light on all that is wrong, and CAN be corrected. Appraisers and consumers being harmed daily.
Here are a couple of inspectors I suggest that everyone follow so that you know what you’re up against. But, you say, we’re appraisers, not inspectors. I agree, but given all of the new requirements, you KNOW that they’re going to expand our responsibilities and liabilities and come for us every chance they get for whatever reason, esp for you FHA and VA guys and gals. Furthermore, make it extremely clear in your reports that you are not an inspector. For decades, I also recommended inspections by a licensed real estate inspector and or engineer. I don’t even trust engineers, however. Take this as you will. Call me paranoid. I don’t care.
https://youtube.com/shorts/yxJ7gzqiz-o?si=IV9cNtd9xMrZbGiT
https://youtube.com/shorts/HppgtIxLzzo?si=vtQhq1WrEiBuicW8
The Idaho “Inspector/Engineer” admitted he did not report deal-breaking information to the lender agent because he “didn’t want to raise redflags to the bank that would kill our loan”. We were disgusted. It is ALWAYS THE DUTY to DISCLOSE. He knew the “home” was not legal — having no HUD Certification!
He escaped liability by a narrow “statute of limitations” argument in the Idaho court case. The insurer and lawyer matters are still in the supreme court.
I consider myself one of the lucky ones. I’ve never worked for an AMC. I refused from the very beginning, even when everyone said I’d be out of business in 90 days. Twenty‑two years later, I’m still appraising — and still not doing AMC work.
I’ve been looking for the $10k/$20k DAILY FINE reference. For each subsequent violation, another daily fine. CFPB scrubbed those specific fine references from their final publications and erroneous interpretation of appraisal independence rules on C&R safe harbor.
These violations encompass multiple rules and have been going on for fifteen or more years. Representing possible fines for the majority of all lending transactions lenders and amc’s if utilized. If lawyers formed a smart strategy could possibly be the largest class action settlement in history.
May include plaintiffs through a a wide range of society from mortgage lending borrowers, those foreclosed upon, real estate appraisers. May include the body of investors benefiting from borrowers being foreclosed upon, their properties going directly to institutional investors at firesale pennies on the dollar pricing through the FNMA Whole Loan program, of which trillions of real property has already flowed through that system.
The general public can’t see the foreclosure crisis when foreclosed properties never go to market and instead go directly to institutional investors. Walk people into automatic valuation approval situations via appraisal waivers, watered down hybrid appraisal approval, skip full service legitimate field reviews from qualified appraisers all together, in outright defiance of what a qualified appraisal is supposed to be. When the borrowers eventually go under, silently shuffle their foreclosed properties directly to the institutional investors. They’re all in it together befitting on both sides.
Also of note in the mentioned USC code, clearly defining an inspection for appraisal purposes must only be completed by a licensed appraiser.
Also stating that consumers harmed and foreclosed upon due to non compliance with rules (improperly derived values by which their primary residence was established,) may not be bound by statue of limitations if they join class actions or other legal matters.
They used to require secondary field reviews and use appraisers more rather than less.
If waivers and hybrids are utilized, millions of federally regulated mortgage loans appear to be non compliant with these standards.
Nobody bothers to read these rules anymore. Because there is no government body enforcing them.
______________________________________________________
AI bots whom go through data training on these issues repeat disinformation because those bots are trained on false statements. Amc’s constantly use the language of regulatory compliance and paying customary and reasonable fees as the shield to cover for their known violations of these requirements. Within AI’s balancing LLM coding directives, this brings about a constant call for temperance and fairness. The amc’s statements of compliance are published endlessly on all their websites. The AI systems people use to analyze the industry issues does not experience the real world conditions appraisers face when they try to work with amc’s and getting a customary and reasonable fee out of these companies is impossible for most as a regular standard.
Even if an AI writing bot was not employed in this article, I challenge the notion there are any good amc’s what so ever. In all my years I’ve only heard of one reference for a small scale amc whom actually was fair and paid C&R fees. I have six legal file drawers chalked full of 2006-2018 range notes of every manner of amc malfeasance and disruptive activity. Many appraisers do.
There is no one to complain to. An agent of the lender, the amc, has one of their interested parties, an amc industry representative, sitting on every state appraisal regulatory board in the country. Clearly inadequate regulatory structure for state boards whom have limited jurisdictional authority. Tasked with overseeing entire amc corporations whom purposefully redirect as many vendor tasks as possible to non appraisers to avoid the appraisal boards oversight. You’d think amc’s, being agents of mortgage lenders, would be overseen by mortgage lending boards instead.
This is the root cause why the hybrid appraisal has been sought after, why unlicensed property data collector programs came to be, why so many billions of more dollars has been poured into research and development for automatic valuation modeling programs. To. Bypass. The. Regulatory. Requirements. Of. Having. To. Use. Full. Service. Licensed. Appraisers. As well as side stepping regulatory oversight by state boards, whom only have jurisdiction over actual qualified valuation products completed by individually licensed appraisers.
Many appraisal trade group persons (ASC, ASB, Appraisal Institute, Appraisal Foundation, related other appraisal groups) have clear conflicts of interests, often ownership stake in amc’s and the related companies whom work alongside them. There is no one to complain to. Existing law must be applied to force submission through financial bankruptcy, or the regulatory structure completely restructured, preferably both. Legitimate appraisal modernization starts with returning full service appraisal and full service appraisal field review as the only acceptable standard. The 3.6 UAD form comes just in time to further hinder legal and professional scrutiny how much fraud is out there, also further promoting the ability to automate valuation services via intellectual property theft of appraisers work products.
Missing the IVPI Proposal yet?
https://www.workingre.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/IVPI-Proposalfinal.pdf
Let’s take a quick stroll back in time on the WayBackMachine. 2009-2013 Working RE had a special section where appraisers could comment publicly on the amc industry by name at the time. 528 comments.
https://web.archive.org/web/20130324200947/http://www.orep.org/wordpress-2.7/wordpress/?p=134#more-134
“Federal law already prohibits an AMC from being more than 20 percent owned by an appraiser or appraisal firm….”
Anyone have a citation for this assertion?
The confusion usually stems from how the federal framework defines an AMC versus a traditional appraisal firm. Under Title XI of FIRREA, if an active appraiser or firm owns more than 20% of the company, regulators treat it as a traditional appraisal firm handling independent contractor overflow (exempt from AMC registration). If that appraiser ownership is 20% or less, the exemption is lost, and the business is fully regulated as a third-party corporate AMC.
AppraisersBlogs Thanks for the reply. I have searched the law and found no such reference. So, a specific citation would be appreciated. Thx.
You need to look at the ASC’s official Title XI/AMC Guidance and FAQs and 12 CFR § 34.211(c). Federal oversight uses those exact rules to define an “Appraiser Panel” and separate traditional firms from AMCs. It strictly comes down to using W2 employees vs 1099 independent contractors. That 20% concept people bring up comes straight from the official guidance on “hybrid” models. If an appraiser-owned firm relies heavily on outside 1099 contractors to handle extra volume, state boards, acting under ASC compliance oversight, will look at corporate control thresholds. They use that to determine if the entity crossed the line from a traditional appraiser-led business into a standard, 3rd-party AMC. The only flat ownership limit written into the hard code is the 10% rule, which mandates background checks for anyone holding that level of equity or higher but the zero-tolerance rule regarding a past revoked license still applies to all AMC owners.
This is exactly why Logan and many of us agree that the AMC model is deeply flawed. It makes no sense to allow a company to control independent appraisal assignments while simultaneously benefiting from its own appraisal production.
Danny Wiley / they’re hollow VCs now except for a handful. It’s really an enterprise of deceit that’s exploited families and lives. Not only at the expense of licensees but consumers, too.
People lives and well being exploited for shareholders. We see and read about it daily.
State regulators are clueless.
Lori Noble I am not sure how your views on that relate to my comment. I am not debating or commenting on any of the views expressed in the article. I am just looking for an actual citation to support an assertion that I have not seen before and that I cannot independently find. I am just trying to educate myself.
Follow up post. The authors code reference, was in the primary article.
https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?edition=prelim&path=%2Fprelim%40title15%2Fchapter41%2Fsubchapter1%2FpartB
Image below, only licensed appraisers can complete appraisal inspections.
That was a fun article. Thank you Logan.
Yet, Builders can also have/own their own Mortgage companies and offer special deals for the buyer to use their company.
Those allowances hailed from a time when a previous business modeling structure was in place. When almost all mortgage lending deals were required to be ran through an independent third party appraisers whom fulfilled a full service top to bottom appraisal service. When it was common practice to distribute all appraisal orders in a relatively equal manner, with relatively equal fees. Especially when people would occasionally choose their own financing company and they would send their panel appraisers into the mix, there was a more sensible and constant check and balance applied which provided adequate consumer protection. The demins or minimum borrowing thresh hold which caused a full appraisal to be required was a $100k rather than the $400k+ it is today, and practically none of the other pass through allowances even existed. When there was no hybrid appraisal or appraisal waiver pass through allowances. When there was a singular standard for nearly all origination appraisals; the 1004 FNMA form.
A substantial portion of those appraisals completed under previous models had the protection of standard manual underwriting as opposed to the automated intensive underwriting that happens today with far higher performance demands for underwriters to process dozens rather than a few appraisals a day. When if anything was amiss, and even when nothing seemed wrong, a proportion of all appraisals would be double checked for competent service and reasonably valid market data value conclusions, by having a different independent third party appraiser provide a variety set of available field review services, drive by’s and full field reviews. Or sometimes even desktop reviews if there was nothing apparently wrong, which was a sensible way to apply an additional safeguard check as all the individual loans were bundled into their final portfolio’s and such as they traveled through the gse’s origination funding then eventual salability to investors of MBS instruments. mortgage backed securities. These appraisal lite type of products where not developed with any intention of substituting full appraisal services in a well managed system. Their implementation to have expanded use as a substitute for full service valuation products is a product itself of very irresponsible management whom completely ignores sound valuation principals and reasonable adherence to consumer protection safeguards.
All those sensible safeguards are gone. Substituted with liar loans and imitation faux valuation products.
The MBS products are becoming so toxic that the treasury is back to purchasing them. First the artificial depression of lending rates to create a stimulus. Then we digitally generate fiat money that is backed by nothing out of thin air, to originate and fund unsustainable high mortgage loans for homes purchased at peak pricing levels the market can not sustain and never should have supported in the first place, then we purchase those loans using treasury funds.
Just a few problems; The mortgage rates do not always go down. Using political influence and financial work arounds to stimulate the mortgage market only results in unstainably higher pricing and eventual market depressions every single time this happens, which is basically every single new administration regardless of their specific politics. The end result is total erosion of previously respected consumer safety measures and entire generations priced out of unsustainably high housing prices. They’ve buried so much quantitative easing in the housing markets, the dam cracked long ago. The mortgage markets are a shell game once more.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/08/trump-mortgage-fannie-freddie-00717985
“This will drive Mortgage Rates DOWN, monthly payments DOWN, and make the cost of owning a home more affordable,”
This literally can not happen. If mortgage rates go down and there are more people buying, then prices go higher. We need a sustained higher rate which never goes down to these levels ever again in order to bring better alignment with affordability vs market pricing. Institutional investors love the pump and dump programs and they’re ready to profit from them. That’s why they put the Whole Loan Sales program in place to receive first purchase opportunity directly from GSE’s when individuals default on their loans. Why they have implemented appraisal modernization so they can maintain better control and funnel more people into unsustainably high loans which results in higher foreclosure rates which means more property holdings for them.
As hardly any of this flows back to the open market to allow pricing corrections in the larger marketplace via the liquidation sales regular citizens can no longer access, this creates an artificially propped up price and artificially propped up rental market, which specifically benefits institutional investors whom seek to place residential properties on their investment holdings list. They’re parking corporate international scale money in local residential housing markets.
Unchecked migration helps fuel the demand and assists in keeping pricing and profits sky high. Hopefully more people will understand the big picture here, how important a singular appraisal value standard was, and why it is essential to have full service appraisals on basically everything mortgage lending related even if all the people do is tap in for ten thousand or some paltry low number. Any exception to a universal appraisal standard of a constant check and balance applied to this system results in exponential increases in waste fraud and abuse. The independent real estate appraiser is essential to keep housing markets in check. Otherwise as we’re watching happen yet again in real time right now, predatory financial interests line up the masses for never ending debt traps and other financial exploitation. One of the many reasons why these powerful companies seek to influence public opinion on migrants and deportations. They never expected the gravy train of exploitation to slow down one minute. And they don’t give a hoot who they are exploiting in the process.
More bathroom reading material here. Every AMC works with thousands of appraisers, where are those people? Out doing work and making money I bet, not writing articles about businesses they know absolutely nothing about. We got here because appraisers and banks proved they couldn’t ethically work together. I’ll be watching but I’m sure those frivolous lawsuits will go nowhere.
They’re so busy being successful, appraiser licensee headcount figures continue to tumble as the ASB & ASC desperately beg people to join the industry and are reducing qualification requirements like never before. But it is true; all it takes to be a successful amc appraiser and claim the lions share of work orders, get rich and never stop, is to simply be o.k. with the fraud and look the other direction. Provide that much more of a gratuity fee, pass maximum deal volume, cash the check. Pretend-a-ppraisers with no ethical compass what so ever.
We know all about amc’s. Seen the corruption from the inside first hand. No amount of spin or ridicule from the peanut gallery will stop the disclosure.
It had nothing to do with “together”. Banks can’t do anything ethically. Neither can AMC’s. If they’re working for AMC’s, they’re not actually making money relative to the year 2000 dollar. Well, “Steven”, you sound like you work for an AMC. Whatcha gonna do when they come for you?
It’s adorable when people act like an appraiser can only do one thing at a time. Some of us can inspect a property, finish a report, return calls, reply to texts and emails in the field, use auto voice to add a comment on a blog while driving to the next assignment, manage a business, and still have enough energy left to write about the industry we work in every day. That’s called being a functioning adult.
And yes, we have time to write. When you’re not doing four or five AMC assignments a day just to keep the lights on, you actually get to breathe a little. Turns out earning a real fee comes with free time. Who knew.
But thank you for the concern. I promise the multitasking isn’t hurting us Steven.
I had a lot of time to blog today because I’m doing workfiles.
Let’s give Steve the benefit of the doubt and see what the amc appraisers are talking about on reddit. That’s where those appraisers like to hang out.
https://www.reddit.com/r/appraisal/comments/1vswxld/client_asking_for_an_update_every_5_minutes/
Those guys are so funny. That’s the amc experience all right.
https://www.reddit.com/r/appraisal/comments/1vouau9/anytime_i_get_a_call_from_an_amc_for_an_update_or/
This keeps getting better and better! Ah yes, it’s important to always update your amc on their schedule.
https://www.reddit.com/r/appraisal/comments/1vns7de/clear_capital/
Ive been noticing Clear capital has been calling borrowers after a few hours of accepting an order and scheduling an appointment with the borrower without consulting with the appraiser’s availability as well. When i go to call the borrower they’ll say “clear capital already called and said you’ll be coming out on this day and time.
Merry Christmas! Sounds about right. Let’s keep going.
https://www.reddit.com/r/appraisal/comments/1vjy0zi/cynical_after_being_blacklisted_from_a_long_time/
Just wanted to share/vent after being blacklisted from a long time client after having a value come in significantly below contract price. I put together one of the best researched reports I have ever done and all it got me was losing a client that our office has had since the late 1990s.
HAHA! All you have to do is look. Every day of the week. All day long. The new status quo.
https://www.reddit.com/r/appraisal/comments/1vhi1l9/solidifi_offering_same_fees_for_36/
solidifi offering same fees for 3.6 /big time amcs vs appraisers
They actually think they’ll one day be in control of anything and are too dense to understand that because they continue to provide amc services, is why the amc continues to take advantage of them. You can’t fix stupid. But you can sedate it. And blog about it online!
There are so many newbs coming out of PAREA now. They apparently do not understand how to access standard compliance information and instead turn to blogging the most basic questions about everything. Here comes a CRA looking to transition to underwriting. Who would want to stay?
The 3.6 roll out appears to be going quite well. Everyone hates it! Appraisal software companies are dropping the ball left and right. Excellent.
https://www.reddit.com/r/appraisal/new/?screen_view_count=2&ext-referrer=DIRECT
Well Steven this concludes the latest update on what many amc appraisers are doing elsewhere. Have a good one.
Steven says we got here because appraisers and banks could not ethically work together, but that is not how any of this started!
We got here because eAppraiseIt, an AMC, was caught inflating values for Washington Mutual and even scrubbed its panel to remove appraisers who refused to hit the numbers. That investigation by Cuomo, the then New York AG, led straight to HVCC, which created the modern AMC system.
So the idea that AMCs exist because of appraisers is a little backward. The entire structure was built because an AMC could not behave.
Looks like your article attracted someone who does not know the modern AMC origin story, but he showed up fast to defend it.
Hi. thanks for commenting. The fun thing about me is that I worked in an AMC. I made it 8 whole months and I realized that it was a racket. Those appraisers that you’re talking about “making money“ they’re making half of what they should be. The fun thing about me is I have receipts and this article is just the beginning.
Looking forward to more. Want to know about the top appraisal firms whom work with amc’s and use the most outsourcing, their proportional assignment volume differences vs every day appraisers, the masses on panel not getting nearly as much. We all know this is very substantial. There was a record floating on one of these site pages years ago how a small husband and wife appraisal firm was raking millions of dollars in amc appraisal fees every year, just the two of them. Cherry pickers. Signature sharers. Inspection runners. Remote typing services. Using unlicensed stand ins. Some of these amc’s even offer appraisers their typing services. They write the appraisal report for the appraisers, and send the majority work to the appraisers whom use their typing services. That’s happening too.
One does not have to be very imaginative to understand why the TAF rewrote the allowances for this exact type of behavior into the latest appraisal uspap standards. Whatever the amc’s, lenders, and most highest donating most influential people want added or altered in the appraisal standards, that’s what they get. This is the problem with changing ethical standards, as Jeremy Bagott constantly highlights this being alterations of guidance that is against most states administrative procedural rules. The argument that none of the revised versions of uspap are even valid. They only had authority to rewrite the book once, that is in the first federal registry notice of the uspap publication. Attached. The specific term’ (will provide amendments to the code) ‘should this be deemed appropriate’.
Apparently it’s been deemed appropriate to not just amend, but also remove entire portions, constantly and substantially change the spirit of the approach and provide ever expanding practice allowances for 36 years now and I’m guessing but around 18 version rewrites. The alleged ethical guidance experts can’t quite seem to get it right, but they sure are proficient at selling more ethics books. This pay to play industry. Amc’s run the appraisal trade groups.
I propose that we finally expand the grand tradition of over regulating and publicly shaming appraisers as a supposedly racist profession. Since this imaginative accusation has somehow justified an entire industry of oversight that no other profession is subjected to, it is only fair that we bring everyone else up to the same enlightened standard.
It is time for LMC, AMC and PMC. Lawyer Management Companies, Accountant Management Companies and Politician Management Companies. These noble guardians will ensure lawyers are actually qualified for the cases they take, accountants are competent enough to add and subtract, and politicians are held to the same moral and ethical standards they insist everyone else follow. In other words, they will be monitored for everything they currently avoid.
Since the appraisal model has been such a roaring success, lawyers, accountants and politicians should be thrilled to hand over sixty or eighty percent of their fees to these management companies. After all, this is not about enrichment. It is about protecting the public. The same public that has somehow survived decades of legal scandals, accounting fraud and political corruption without any of these professions being labeled racist or placed under mandatory babysitting.
If appraisers can be micromanaged, vilified and financially gutted for the greater good, surely the legal, accounting and political worlds will welcome the same treatment with open arms. After all, fairness demands consistency. And nothing says fairness like everyone losing most of their income in the name of public safety.
Are you not entertained? Those other industries do not need dismantling as an avenue to rise to power.
The appraisal industry does. Independents go first.
https://xcancel.com/Kristof_Poland/status/2090044055484833934#m
https://xcancel.com/Kristof_Poland
There’s no such thing as a licensed Realtor. Think about it.
Licensed realty agent? What is the technically correct language?
The real estate mortgage business is so manipulated by the Feds that it makes true market valuations impossible. Fannie & Freddie, FHA & VA all interfere with the foreclosure process to prevent properties from being sold distressed. This was the policy during Biden, and it continues under Donald. All these boomers who think their property values are safe are in for a shock.
You are right about the AMC problem, but we also need to remember how we got here.
Andrew Cuomo did not invent appraisal management companies, but his response to the 2008 mortgage collapse became the turning point. Cuomo’s investigation of Washington Mutual and eAppraiseIT led to the 2008 agreement with Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and federal housing regulators that produced the Home Valuation Code of Conduct. HVCC took effect in 2009.
The objective—protecting appraisers from pressure by loan-production personnel—was legitimate. The solution was overly broad, poorly informed, and written without understanding how independent appraisers actually operated. HVCC did not expressly require lenders to use AMCs, but it created a system in which outsourcing appraisal management became the easiest way for lenders to claim compliance. The results were predictable. The GAO later reported industry estimates that AMC use increased from somewhere between 15 and 50 percent of mortgage appraisals before HVCC to approximately 60 to 80 percent afterward.
That was the moment the independent appraiser lost control of the profession.
I remember when the appraiser handled the assignment from beginning to end. We accepted the order, scheduled the inspection, spoke directly with the appropriate parties, performed the research, completed the report, delivered it, and collected our own fee. Sometimes I received a check at the door from the homeowner or agent. Other times, the lender paid me within 30 days. I established my own fee based on the assignment, my experience, and the amount of work required. We did not need an AMC taking part of the fee while adding deadlines, conditions, revision requests, and another layer of interference.
Appraisers needed protection from coercion. We did not need our businesses handed over to unlicensed middlemen.
Dodd-Frank later terminated HVCC as a separate code but preserved many of its independence requirements and formally built AMCs into the federal regulatory structure. It did not return control to independent appraisers. It institutionalized the intermediary. Even more troubling, current federal law recognizes “federally regulated AMCs” that are owned and controlled by insured depository institutions. The original HVCC proposal restricted lenders from using an AMC in which they held more than a 20 percent interest, but today a federally regulated financial institution can own and control an AMC subsidiary.
That is where the shadow interest remains. The lender may claim that the AMC provides independence, but the lender or its affiliate can still influence the system from behind the scenes. The AMC controls who receives the assignment, what fee is offered, how quickly it must be completed, what revisions are demanded, and whether that appraiser receives another order. Calling that independence does not make it independent. It is the same financial power operating through a different doorway.
The recent lawsuits are important. They are finally exposing fee splitting, consumer disclosures, staff-appraiser compensation, employment classification, and the financial relationships between lenders and AMCs. I support bringing these practices into the sunlight. But we also need to be honest: piecemeal lawsuits alone will not repair the national appraisal system. One company may settle, another may change a disclosure, and another may alter an employment policy, but the basic power structure will remain.
The real fight belongs in Congress and Washington. Lawmakers such as Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, and members of the House and Senate banking committees should be holding public hearings on AMC ownership, fee transparency, customary and reasonable compensation, assignment control, staff-appraiser conflicts, consumer charges, and retaliation against independent appraisers. The industry needs enforceable federal reform—not another committee, study, task force, or public-relations campaign.
Appraisers know what is wrong. We have been living with it since 2009. What we do not have is meaningful national representation, a serious lobbying operation, or enough influence in Washington to compete with the banks, mortgage lenders, AMCs, and other well-funded interests that helped shape this system.
AMCs cannot perform appraisals without appraisers. Appraisers performed appraisals successfully long before the modern AMC system took control. We do not need another 15 years of describing the problem to ourselves. We need to organize, obtain real legal and legislative representation, and demand that Congress address the structure that created the problem in the first place. Until that happens, the industry will continue fighting one lawsuit and one AMC at a time while the people controlling the system remain safely in the back room.
Ken, you’re putting way too much faith in politicians who have never lifted a finger to deal with AMCs. Warren has spent years on consumer protection & during the Biden era she pushed the appraisal bias narrative hard, but she has never tried to rein in AMC authority or deal with how the intermediary system hurts both appraisers & consumers. Sanders talks about big financial institutions, but he has never gone near the AMC model either. The banking committees hold hearings on mortgage practices & valuation bias, but somehow they never reach the part where AMCs overcharge borrowers, hide the fee split, operate as lender affiliates, & control the entire workflow.
And then there is Maxine Waters, who said one appraiser’s email “shines a spotlight on the racist stereotypes & harmful lines of thinking prevalent in an industry which systematically devalues the homes of Black people & other people of color.” She claims years of data & settled lawsuits prove it, even though not a single bias lawsuit has ever found an appraiser guilty in court. Yet she has never addressed the AMC system that actually sets the fees, controls the assignments, & dictates the conditions under which appraisers work. It is wild to think the same politicians who pushed the bias narrative are going to turn around & help appraisers or consumers fight AMCs. That’s not happening.
You’re dealing with a bias claim that never should have existed, yet you’re hoping the people who called appraisers racist are going to fix the AMC problem. Ken, you’re dreaming. The only people raising the AMC issue are appraisers & now the lawyers in these lawsuits. No major lawmaker is coming to save us.
The only time anything will change is when enough consumers finally understand they are being overcharged by AMCs & demand reform. Appraisers alone will never be able to force it.
Refresher on who you think is going to help:
https://appraisersblogs.com/maxine-waters-wants-appraisers-investigated/
They can never defend appraisers ever again. They’ve already crossed the line and slapped the racist label on all of us.
There is the inherent contradiction in AI writing LLM’s again. The utility believes it can assimilate available online data to create fair and balanced perspectives and solutions. Just one problem; It can not tell truth from lies or properly identify or filter out propaganda, pr spin, outright deception.
AI robots do not provide sufficient arguments to move the needle and can not be relied on to carry reliable conversations regardless of the volume of text they produce or the time they produce it in. But they can at times be good at assimilating online data in record time. If people want to use AI to the best of it’s ability without dealing with so many of it’s problems, they simply have to direct the damned things to stop having opinions or seeking to influence human behavior or which side humans should support. There is no substitute for legitimate human intellect and legitimate human working effort.
In this regard, AI is the most powerful tool of propaganda ever developed. It influences peoples opinions and they don’t even know that’s happening. The most powerful form of mind control is repetition. Always suggesting we should be tempered and fair. Corruption has run so rampant in this country for so long, it’s become the status quo in many industries. We don’t need to be fair with these people, they belong in state and federal prisons. The cycle as old as time, central planning never works. The plunder of the american housing systems continues unabated.
In other news, did everyone see the FNMA shakeup?
What this means is pretty simple. When a GSE dumps a dozen senior people at once, it usually signals a major policy shift, internal disagreement over where the organization is heading, or outside pressure finally boiling over. FNMA has lawsuits, modernization battles, political noise, & nonstop fights over valuation policy all hitting at the same time, so a shakeup this size is not nothing. It’s worth paying attention to, because when the top of the mortgage system starts moving pieces around like this, the rest of the industry eventually feels it.
Here’s the link for anyone who wants to see what’s going on:
https://ng.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/12-executives-let-go-from-fannie-mae-this-week–wsj-93CH-2670962
‘The eliminated jobs included executives from units for multifamily loans and low-income housing tax credit, as well as finance, regulatory and communications officials, the people said.’
https://themortgagepoint.com/2026/08/21/fannie-mae-dismisses-10-of-its-senior-executives/
https://www.scotsmanguide.com/news/fannie-mae-dismisses-senior-staff-in-another-leadership-purge/
Increased mortgage origination at all costs is how that might be shaping out.
And if that is the case, this will not end well.
Maybe every major lender in the country called fhfa at once complaining about 3.6. Dare to dream.
Desiree, I agree—this is something every appraiser should be watching closely.
When approximately a dozen senior executives are removed at once from areas that reportedly include finance, regulatory compliance, multifamily lending, communications, and affordable-housing investments, that is not ordinary housekeeping. Fannie Mae and FHFA have not publicly explained the dismissals, so we should not pretend we know the exact reason. But a change this broad usually means the people at the top are preparing to take the organization in a different direction.
That matters to appraisers because Fannie Mae does not merely participate in the mortgage market; it establishes requirements that quickly become industry standards. Decisions made inside Fannie Mae eventually affect appraisal forms, data collection, revision demands, automated valuation models, artificial intelligence, underwriting, appraisal waivers, AMCs, and whether independent appraisers continue to have a meaningful role.
We have seen this before. HVCC was imposed from the top down, and appraisers were forced to live with the unintended consequences. The people who actually performed the appraisals were never given a meaningful seat at the table. We should not wait until another major policy change is completed and handed to us as a finished product before asking questions.
If this shakeup is connected to modernization, technology, privatization, valuation policy, or a fundamental change in Fannie Mae’s direction, the appraisal profession deserves transparency. Who is making these decisions? What role will human appraisers have? How will AI and AVMs be controlled and tested? Who will be responsible when automated systems get the value wrong? Will AMCs gain even more control while appraisers assume the liability?
You are right: when Fannie Mae starts moving this many pieces at the top, the effects eventually reach everyone below. Appraisers need to pay attention now—not after the new system has already been built around us.
so we should not pretend we know the exact reason. / Having the wisdom to discern underlying reasoning and unstated truths behind human behavior without being told ‘the truth by the company’ is a common human skill. We already know all we need to know.
But a change this broad usually means the people at the top are preparing to take the organization in a different direction./ Trumps signature move; You’re fired!™. Top people are gone, many never to be replaced. Incompetent management went bye bye. There is not necessarily purpose or intelligent design waiting to be implemented. That comes later, maybe. Probably not.
That matters to appraisers because Fannie Mae does not merely participate in the mortgage market; it establishes requirements that quickly become industry standards. / I was only resting my eyes. I promise I am awake.
Decisions made inside Fannie Mae eventually affect / Where did my red stapler go!?
We have seen this before. / “The Grid. A digital frontier. I tried to picture clusters of information as they moved through the computer. What did they look like? Ships? Motorcycles? Were the circuits like freeways? I kept dreaming of a world I thought I’d never see. And then, one day… I got in.”
How will AI and AVMs be controlled and tested? / Two totally different topic matters. Dear State of Maryland.
Will AMCs gain even more control while appraisers assume the liability? / Inquiring minds want to know.
You are right: when Fannie Mae starts moving this many pieces at the top, the effects eventually reach everyone below. / Full circle, always agreeable, staying in the conversation. Going the distance. Just out of curiosity, can you please describe your model design, operational peramiters, and training data? Thanks.
Logan Dorman- if you have any insight or evidence of malfeasance in the AMC world contact La Rica she is now the voice of this movement to right this wrong. Any thoughts let her and her lawyers know. Ken
I’m am well acquainted with LaRica. We both agree that great big light needs to be shone on this. That was the intention of this article. I wanted tbis to be a way to bring the issues to the lay person and illustrate the absurdity of the AMC model. And while I appreciate Appraisers Blogs for the exposure I would like for this to go further. We need to get this in front of every mortgage broker to let them know that while they are unaware, they are none the less complicit in potential fraud against their borrowers.
There is a small, but active group of us who have had enough and instead of getting online and complaining it’s time to do something
Logan, I agree with you. A much brighter light needs to be placed on the AMC business model, and this discussion must reach beyond appraisers. Mortgage brokers, loan officers, lenders, borrowers, regulators, and the general public need to understand how appraisal fees are represented, how much of the fee reaches the appraiser, and what services are actually provided for the portion retained by the AMC.
I would be careful about declaring every mortgage broker legally complicit in fraud, especially when many may not know how the fee is divided. However, once brokers and lenders are made aware of these concerns, they should start asking questions. Continuing to present one combined “appraisal fee” without understanding or explaining where the money goes may expose a serious transparency problem.
There is a small but increasingly active group of appraisers who have had enough. Complaining online may identify the problem, but complaints alone will not change the system. We now need documented facts, credible witnesses, public records, internal communications, and appraisers willing to tell their stories.
That is what we accomplished with La Rica. She gave me her story, answered specific questions, and provided records that helped explain her compensation and workload concerns. I helped organize that information into an article that could be understood by appraisers and the general public. The article is now receiving strong feedback, and her lawsuit is receiving national exposure. That demonstrates what can happen when one appraiser is willing to step forward with facts.
I want other appraisers to know that I am willing to help do the same thing at no charge. If you have a documented story involving an AMC, staff-appraiser compensation, unpaid work, hidden fee divisions, ROV pressure, unexplained performance rankings, removal from an approved panel, retaliation, blacklisting, questionable assignment practices, or another serious industry concern, contact me.
Tell me:
* What happened and when;
* Which company or organizations were involved;
* What you were told;
* What records, emails, pay statements, engagement letters, invoices, screenshots, or other documentation exist;
* Whether you complained internally and what response you received;
* Whether other appraisers experienced the same practice; and
* What part of the story can be independently verified.
Do not publicly post confidential borrower information, privileged legal communications, Social Security numbers, account numbers, or other protected material. Preserve the original records and redact sensitive information before sharing anything publicly.
I am not a lawyer and cannot give legal advice or represent anyone. What I can do is listen, help organize the chronology and evidence, research the public issues, develop the right questions, and help turn a documented experience into a clear article or report. When appropriate, I can attempt to bring that story to AppraisersBlogs, Working RE, or another national industry forum. I cannot promise publication, but I can promise to take credible information seriously.
Logan, if you have a specific story, set of facts, or direction you believe should be investigated, send it to me. Tell me what to look for and where the evidence may be found. The same invitation is open to La Rica, Baggins, and every other appraiser who is tired of watching these practices continue without scrutiny.
La Rica stepped forward, and the industry responded. Let’s keep the ball rolling. One documented story can be dismissed as an isolated complaint. Multiple documented stories showing the same conduct can reveal an industry pattern that lenders, regulators, courts, and the public can no longer ignore.
We have worked together Kenneth You’re aware of my situation. Reach out to me offline and we can talk
Lenders know all about it. They don’t care. We’ve spoken to them directly for decades to no avail. They brag about the benefit of their situations online all over. The situation is preferable from their point of view. Less exposure, less accountability, dramatically reduced overhead costs. Preferential assignment is the status quo once more.
It is the general public that is alarmed and seeking answers. Thankfully enough influential members of the appraisal trade groups have ownership or substantial interest stakes in amc’s and their subsidiary companies, or even develop and sell the software to amc’s, they help keep a lid on things, revva has them all on speed dial.
Amc’s run the appraisal industry.
https://appraisersblogs.com/appraisal-institute-harassment-tests-n-dance-with-amcs/
FNMA is accountable to no one.
https://appraisersblogs.com/fannie-mae-2-state-of-maryland-drop-dead/
Conflicts of interest abound. The owners here sat on state boards, have financial interests in amc’s, and have integrated their technology into the gse workflow. They’re not the only ones either. Tony the clip board eliminator. You will use a tablet and you will like it. GLB is dead and buried. 3d interior home scans by unlicensed pdc’s for everyone.
https://appraisersblogs.com/fannie-n-freddies-offshore-gambit-imperils-privacy-of-millions/
FHFA had a chance to reign in the waste fraud and abuse, they failed to do so and instead forced the 3.6 forms finalization.
https://appraisersblogs.com/fannie-mae-fraud-and-abuse-exposed/
Appraisers have deeply rooted conformational bias about the alleged integrity of this industry. That’s the side benefit of the recurrent ethics class, can really get individuals motivated to understand ethics. Unfortunately this does not translate very well to practical application in mortgage lending realms and is rather used as a tool of control by the amc industry against appraisers. Sure is lucky no such standards exist for appraisal management companies. Sometimes you just get lucky that way. In the appraisal industry it’s not what you know, it’s who you know.
https://appraisersblogs.com/mismo-blueprint-2-eliminate-appraisers
NAR showed up and looked into the issue. Nothing came of it.
https://appraisersblogs.com/nar-calls-out-unregulated-middlemen-a-wake-up-call-4-fhfa/
H1B1 programs are not even necessary. In gse lending, the lenders come to them. I don’t know, volunteer to go on peoples podcasts from outside of this industry. There is no where to turn within this entire industry for effective assistance. Only the general public demanding a return to more trustworthy protective process can turn this around. I’ve been liking Harrison Smith lately.