Deborah, Joan Trice owns several peripherally appraisal related companies and has long advocated for AMC interests…though to be fair so has the AI. If you dig though many of the older AppraisersBlogs articles you will find information on how many and what they are associated with.

Check Appraisers Expo in Vegas and you’ll find 1/3 to slightly less than half the companies sponsoring the event are either hers or associates through one of her networks. Its one of the reasons I don’t go to an Appraisers Expo

Joan Trice testified before congress I believe, and therefore she should be subject to a lot of examination with respect to any conflict of interest when she speaks about the appraisal profession.

Apparently, she didn’t go very far up in the appraisal business, so she found a way to feed off other’s licenses, e & O, work and efforts, not to say her “cut” of their work.  My gut says she owns an amc. who know about her “special” interests?  I would say if she owns an amc then she is a special interest, sucking the blood of other appraisers. If she is not doing this I would also like someone here to come to her defense.  Since she testified to congress regarding our profession, then I say it is fair game to criticize her, but I’d like to have the facts!

AARO is valuable. Do not disparage it.

Baggs, the C&R fees originally proposed by AGA (appraisersguild.org) are derived from hourly equivalents.

Reasonable fees can be equated to hourly rates and experience. BUT…given the resistance to the much lower presumed C&R fees of Virginia there isn’t a chance that AMCs or lenders will voluntarily pay minimum C&R fees.

Worse, they are busy getting the TAF/AQB to revise the experience rules so that they can turn raw trainees and novices into ‘certified experts’ in just one year. Couple that with Institute promoted (lower) alternative valuation product lowered guidelines and its no wonder we see fees of from $49.00 to $90 being touted by the likes of First American under their various monopolistic umbrella and subsidiary companies.

Informative post.

in 1973 I dealt cards, and roulette in Las Vegas. During slow periods it was customary for all dealers to act as shills, to attract customers that didn’t like to play at tables where no other players were. There were however strict rules of accepted conduct as a shill.

We could not do any of the dumb stuff that amateur gamblers often do that could screw up the game or affect the outcome. We were dressed in our uniform white shirts and black trousers, and if anyone asked if we were dealers or shills, had to identify that we were and offer to sit out hands played while they were playing.

If only Joan Trice would identify who and what she really is in the world of AMCs. It would be so much easier for the real players to tell the bad guys from the good guys.

Didn’t read at all. Too difficult. Paragraphs Baggins!

Joan has no remote claim to being independent or impartial. Neither does she have any meaningful credibility among independent appraisers. If Clearbox is the only independent third party “study”, how come she was unable to produce that in support of her testimony regarding a purported study in support of a specific banks fees in the South?

Hi Mike!!!! I missed you. So glad to hear from you 🙂

PS

HI Des!

Now, if only the remaining 49 states would pull their heads out from a deep, dark and dank place and start focusing on FIRREA and common sense problem areas instead of violating USPAP in their own review appraisals, and attempting to fund their departments by coercing appraisers into signing spurious settlement agreements.

Elimination of AARO might also be a good idea since it appears to be more of a clearing house for regulatory misinformation than meaningful educational association for the enforcement of FIRREA as it was originally intended by Congress.

Bill, VaCap has been prepared and willing to promote the interests of ALL appraisers where and when possible.

What they cannot do is to convince my state (California), or Minnesota, or New York, of Maryland, or New Jersey to pass legislation to assure and promote C&R fees, rather than completely ignoring USPAP when complaints are received, and then trying to coerce appraisers into signing consent decrees rather than determining if a real USPAP violation has occurred!

Only we can identify our states short comings, and take action to correct them. Once that’s done we can ask for help from AGA, and or VaCap, and or any of all of the other 21 state coalitions that aren’t also owned by AMCs.

Yep.  C&R was predicated on the assumption that clients ran orders through with equivalent terms and such.  Those were the good old days.  Flash forward; C&R is a client specific concern because one hooligan can ruin it for everyone else by asking too much, demanding too many changes, and being overly reliant on FNMA CU XML review systems.  C&R can have some reasonable cross reference basis, but there are obvious variables to time management, workflow volume, reliability of that volume, and such similar concerns that simply cannot be over looked. C&R left the building at the exact same moment FNMA CU stepped in and half of the underwriting departments went automated.  Here is a bright idea nobody has mentioned that I know of;  C&R for ML should be based solely on non ML work….  Usually my bright ideas materialize with unintended consequences, so please don’t give that too much credit, but it’s the concept that will hopefully be meaningful.  If I could log in to some platform and bill per hour for bonafide verifiable work effort, I’d charge twice as much as the rest of them.  Elvis has left the building.  Do not be alarmed.  It had to happen sooner or later.

Called a plumber on a Friday afternoon. Told him that my toilet is clogged and that I am having a house full of company this weekend. He says my fee is XXX for the service call, my fee is XXX for unclogging your sewer and my fee is XXX for doing this on the weekend. I SHOUT this is not customary and reasonable!  He says for me to “bite him” and hangs up. What do you suppose he meant by that?

For my fellow appraisers that allow someone else to determine their fees, I really do not wish you the best! LOL

Have they consulted with an ethics expert if that is allowable under ‘acceptable assignment conditions’? / Also specifically;  Will the appraisers report which is the substance of the complaint be reviewed by the board?  When did it become the appraisers job to take on personal risk in order to police the industry which the state board is tasked with policing in the first place?  Blacklisting lives on and appraisers whom initiate these complaints risk black listing in one form or another.  Word of mouth travels fast.  Will a review appraiser be able to initiate a complaint after learning an origination appraiser failed to submit a complaint with a verifiable unacceptable fee schedule?  Are VA appraisers required to disclose appraisal servicing billing notes in the reports?  Defending against a complaint initiated by another is in fact entirely different than initiating a complaint.  Has the board ever audited an amc or lender entity regarding these fees?  This is confusing precedence to set for other states.  I fail to understand why the appraiser is involved with the amc’s burden of proof requirement.  Engagement is not an executed contract, it is an agreement of service terms.  Any contractual obligation rests with the lender, their agents, and the borrowing consumer.  The appraiser is just the independent value analyst and does nothing more than agree to provide a limited scope service for individual requests.  Please correct me if I’m mistaken.

The reason the appraiser has to complete the assignment is simple;there has to an executed contract for the state to take any action. The burden of proof is on the AMC. If the AMC provides any data that conflicts with  the requirements of law, the data will be invalid and will be thrown out. If an AMC  uses a third party survey, they must provide the data, analysis and conclusions of that survey. This is really no different than an appraiser turning  over the work file of an appraisal assignment to defend against any complaint they may receive.

Bill

I just heard that I was banned from AppraisalBuzz as well for making a remarkably tame comment: “Joan Trice left appraising years ago for more profitable ventures”.  Coming from me that’s as tame as it gets.  Learning that I’ve been banned from their “AMC Propaganda Pumping Website” made my night to be honest.

I did quite alot of research on Princess Joan Trice and the shell companies that she runs.  As it turns out each of her companies (that you would think are huge) are run from Postal Service Stores.   I can’t blame her for a second for getting out of appraising when she did but at least I had the good sense to avoid AMCs.  This witch EMBRACES AMCs for Christ sake.  It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that she is either a full or partial owner of an AMC.

I encourage you to write an article on Joan Trice and her many companies Bill.  Your responses on the AppraisalBuzz.com website have been dead on every time.  The fact that they can’t accept your honesty says it all.  Tell us what you think of Ms. Trice and Appraisal Buzz.  I’m all ears.

The notion of having to accept a verifiably non C&R fee prior to being able to take action, seems more like deception than solution. Whom suggested this approach, and please name them specifically.  Imagine that ethic applied to bribery. Does the state officer need to accept a bribe prior to filing charges? Must an appraiser violate AIR, before they are allowed to have a substantiated complaint regarding undue influence? Same concept, different application.  Appraisers should not accept unethical engagement, nor should licensed entity amc’s or their lenders allow such promotion of unethical engagement. There are already rules in place that the lender must have sufficient oversight of the process. Lenders and their amc agents should not get special treatment regarding unethical behavior, or an additional layer of bureaucratic protection regarding that. This solution sounds like an attempt to stop an up and coming rule which might actually be the first rule nationally to provide some effective action regarding the C&R rule. Another lender think tank hail mary to stop C&R compliance. The consequences might tie directly to a 10k/20k daily per instance and possibly retroactive fine. Knowing your report will likely be held under scrutiny from the lender, the amc, and the state, is certainly a very strong deterrent. Enter the chilling effect. Will the state review the appraisers report prior to substantiating the complaint, or will they do that afterwards? Obviously the lenders will, since you would have completed a report for them, and then immediately filed a complaint. Enter personal liability. Has anyone consulted with the EO insurers regarding this? Consult with an ethics lawyer because something is not right in Denmark.