Quite a bit has transpired since the first "It's Time to Regulate Appraisal Management Companies" post here on Appraiser Active. Additional form are required for mortgage loan appraisals and, most notably, the Home Valuation Code of Conduct (HVCC) has been implemented.
However, some things don't change. Back in January, the Appraiser Active post noted that Appraisal Management Companies typically administer a network of certified and licensed appraisers to fulfill real estate appraisal assignments on behalf of mortgage lending institutions. They often recruit, qualify and verify licensure for their panel of appraisers.
We also mentioned a major problem with Appraisal Management Companies; they are completely outside the regulatory loop controlling real estate appraisers and protecting the public. No state or Federal agency is tasked with the regulation of Appraisal Management Companies. In fact, there is a documented case of a Florida Appraisal Management Company owned and operated by an individual that surrendered his Certified Residential Appraiser credential for permanent revocation to avoid prosecution for several complaints. That story was detailed by the St. Petersburg Times in May, 2009.
Well folks, it's time to gear up for the 2010 effort to REGULATE APPRAISAL MANAGEMENT COMPANIES IN FLORIDA!
Take a look at HB 303, filed in the Florida House of Representatives yesterday by Representative Matt Hudson. Matt is a REALTOR®, and well aware of the problems associated with Appraisal Management Companies.
Regulation of Real Estate Appraisers & Appraisal Management Companies:
Requires appraisal management companies to register with DBPR; provides exemptions; specifies application requirements & procedures; requires application, registration, & renewal fees for appraisal management companies; requires fingerprinting & criminal history records checks of, & provides qualifications for, certain persons who control appraisal management companies; requires nonresident appraisal management companies to consent to commencement of actions in this state; establishes additional acts for which appraisers are subject to disciplinary action; provides for discipline of appraisal management companies by Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board; provides penalties; revises requirements for retention of appraisal records; requires appraisal management companies to follow such requirements; requires DBPR & board to adopt certain rules.
Thanks, Matt!
Please let Rep. Hudson know of your appreciation, and how important this bill is for the appraisal profession, the real estate market and consumer protection in Florida.
Tallahassee Office - (850) 488-1028
Naples Office - (239) 417-6270
Pembrooke Pines Office - (954) 704-2990
email - matt.hudson@myfloridahouse.gov
Press Release - Majority Office
Posts
4 comments:
NM has already enacted an AMC requirement (maybe too soon and too little) but it's there - not as strong as I've seen from some of the other states - It is going to drive the AMCs nuts attempting to comply with ALL the DIFFERENT state regs for them. It could almost be comical except I think the AMCs will look at the one that is the most strict and comply with it and almost force feed it on the other states.
Good luck to you folks in The Sunshine State.
What good does regulating AMCs do other than making sure Florida will once again receive those valuable tax dollars that fled the state after May 1st?
From the borrowers point of view it achieves nothing because the appraisals being done on their properties are now being farmed out to the lowest bidding most incompetent appraisers on planet earth.
The only way to repair the problem with regulation is to forbid AMCs from receiving compensation from the appraiser and insist upon complete honesty on the HUD-1 regarding the AMC fee.
I was recently shown an appraisal by a lender who pointed out the following disclaimer within the appraisal report:
"Although the HUD-1 may indicate that the appraiser was paid $500 he in fact has a 50% chance of being paid $150 by the Appraisal Management Company (1/2 of what he was able to bill prior to May 1, 2009). Please note that the amount of time spent on research for this report has been reduced to correspond with the appraiser's fee; therefore, the accuracy of the appraisal has also been compromised. Neither the appraiser or the appraisal company assumes liability for the inaccuracy of the report as we have been asked to provide cost cutter services for a cost cutter fee".
Although the appraisal was declined and my client lost $500 I applaud the honesty and integrity of the appraiser.
Any update on the proposed legislation?
Post a Comment