| |||
61J1-7.0065 Signatures on Appraisal Report and Certification.It might be wise to keep this rule in mind and ready for quick reference when some folks (like those mentioned in THIS post) attempt to require you to upload a copy of your digital signature.
(1) Each appraiser signing a certification of an appraisal report must sign the certification with the name that the licensee has registered with the Department. A signature may be represented by a handwritten mark or a digitized image controlled by a personal identification number, password, or other security feature. A facsimile signature may be either affixed by hand or electronically by computer software. An appraiser shall at all times maintain direct control of the appraiser’s signature.
(2) An appraiser shall develop and maintain a written method by which his or her signature shall be affixed, for its security protection and the prohibition of practices that might discredit its use.
(3) An appraiser shall not grant blanket authority to another to affix the appraiser’s signature to an appraisal report or other work performed by the appraiser. Any grant of permission to another to affix an appraiser’s signature to an appraisal report or other work performed by the appraiser shall meet the following requirements:
(a) Be in writing;
(b) Extend only to one specific appraisal report; and
(c) Be maintained in the appraiser’s work file.
Rulemaking Authority 475.614 FS. Law Implemented 475.613(2), 475.614 FS. History–New 12-4-06, Amended 12-20-11.
April 2011Much more will be discussed. If you are a member of the National Association of Realtors, and happen to be attending the meetings, or are in the DC area, stop by. We encourage your participation.
"In recent months interference in the appraisal process has unnecessarily put at risk a sustainable housing recovery. Our member appraisers are dealing with changes in the real estate market due to economic conditions in the country, their long time business relationships with market participants have been destroyed and their business models have been shattered. The latest blow is their enduring the consequences of the implementation of aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act.
Appraisers are being asked to include distressed transactions as comparable sales, to complete the appraisal in an unreasonable and unrealistic short time span, and to comply with a scope of work not justified by the fee being offered. In some situations appraisers are required to provide as many as eight comparable sales and/or listings. NAR believes this is interference in appraiser independence, causing harm to the real estate recovery, and harmful to consumers.
This month, compliance with the Federal Reserve's interim final rule amending Regulation Z (Truth in Lending) became mandatory. Early reports indicate that some appraisal management companies may be misinterpreting the reasonable and customary fee requirements of the statute and the interim rule. Although NAR has not commented on the customary and reasonable fee language of the statute or the interim rule, we are concerned that unfair treatment of our member appraisers will further erode their businesses and impact the quality of appraisal reports, adding risk for consumers and lenders.
NAR 2010 President Ron Phipps said "asking for up to 10 comps, reducing turnaround times, and expanding the scope of the assignment without appropriately adjusting the fee is adding unnecessary risk to an already fragile mortgage market system. We must maintain an environment where our independent appraisers are treated fairly as they are the lynchpin of the mortgage transaction." NAR has long advocated for an independent appraisal process and enhanced education requirements to promote public trust in the appraisal profession. NAR wants to ensure the consumer is provided the service bargained for along with a well-supported, credible opinion of value."
13.11 One aspect of the determination of Appraiser compliance with LandSafe Security Requirements is a review of Appraiser Security Controls. As a condition precedent to performance under this Agreement, Appraiser agrees to satisfy the following validation requirements: (a) participation in LandSafe’s Appraiser assessment process including the completion of online or on-site assessment(s), as appropriate, and remediation of any findings; (b) periodic discussions between LandSafe personnel and Appraiser Information Technology security personnel to review Appraiser Security Controls; and (c) if requested delivery to LandSafe of network diagrams depicting Appraiser perimeter controls and security policies and processes relevant to the protection of Confidential Information. Examples of these policies include, but are not limited to, access control, physical security, patch management, password standards, encryption standards, and change control.
14.1 Appraiser shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless LandSafe and its Representatives, successors and permitted assigns from and against any and all claims or legal actions of whatever kind or nature that are made or threatened by any third party and all related losses, expenses, damages, costs and liabilities, including reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses incurred in investigation, defense or settlement ("Damages"), which arise out of, are alleged to arise out of, or relate to the following: (a) any negligent act or omission or willful misconduct by Appraiser or its Representatives engaged by Appraiser in the performance of Appraiser’s obligations under this Agreement; or (b) any breach in a representation, covenant or obligation of Appraiser contained in this Agreement.
17.1 Appraiser shall maintain at no additional cost to LandSafe, in a reasonably accessible location, all Records pertaining to its Services provided to LandSafe under this Agreement for a period of ten (10) years, and if such Records are used in a judicial (or other dispute resolution) proceeding related to an Appraisal Order(s), Appraiser shall retain them for ten (10) years following the disposition of the proceeding. Such Appraiser Records referenced above may be inspected, audited and copied by LandSafe, its Representatives or by federal or state agencies having jurisdiction over LandSafe, during normal business hours and at such reasonable times as LandSafe and Appraiser may determine. Records available for review shall exclude any records pertaining to Appraiser’s other customers deemed proprietary and confidential and Appraiser confidential and proprietary records not associated with the Services provided under the Agreement. Appraiser will give prior notice to LandSafe of requests by federal or state authorities to examine Appraiser’s LandSafe Records. At LandSafe’s written request, Appraiser shall reasonably cooperate with LandSafe in seeking a protective order with respect to such Records.
17.2 During regular business hours but no more frequently than once a year, LandSafe may, at its sole expense, perform a confidential audit of Appraiser’s operations as they pertain to the Services provided under this Agreement. Such audits shall be conducted on a mutually agreed upon date (which shall be no more than ten (10) Business Days after LandSafe’s written notice of time, location and duration), subject to reasonable postponement by Appraiser upon Appraiser’s reasonable request, provided, however, that no such postponement shall exceed twenty (20) Business Days. LandSafe will provide Appraiser a summary of the findings from each report prepared in connection with any such audit and discuss results, including any remediation plans. If audit results find Appraiser is not in substantial compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, then LandSafe shall be entitled, at Appraiser’s expense, to perform up to two (2) additional such audits in that year in accordance with the procedure set forth in this Section. Appraiser agrees to promptly take action at its expense to correct those matters or items identified in any such audit that require correction. Failure to correct such matters shall be considered a material breach of this Agreement.
Effective October 15, 2010 we are adopting appraiser independence requirements that maintain the spirit and intent of the Home Valuation Code of Conduct (HVCC). Freddie Mac has worked with the Federal Housing Finance Agency and Fannie Mae to develop appraisal independence requirements to replace the HVCC, which is expected to sunset this month.Here's the Freddie Mac Appraiser Independence Requirements:
To serve the specialized needs of those members with an interest in real estate appraisal by:
1) monitoring, reviewing, examining, and analyzing appraisal-related issues for NAR;If you are a member of a local association of REALTORS, you may recommend yourself to serve as a member of the Appraisal Committee. The committee meets in person twice a year. In 2011, we will meet in Washington, D.C. (sometime between May 9 - 14, 2011), and in Anaheim, California (sometime between November 9 - 14, 2011)
2) referring appraisal-related issues to appropriate NAR committees for their consideration; and
3) providing recommendations on appraisal-related issues to the Board of Directors.
A year ago, the nation's housing industry adopted new rules aimed at preventing the kind of appraisal-related fraud that helped drive home prices to ridiculous — and unsustainable — heights.
Now, many Tampa Bay real estate agents say the appraisal rules are a good idea gone bad, delaying and threatening sales as the market struggles to recover.
Take the case of Luke Nuemann, who was planning a move from Tampa to Pinellas County.
In February, Neumann found his dream home: a lovingly restored, 1936 traditional with garage apartment in St. Petersburg's desirable Woodlawn area. He signed a contract for $375,000, and the lender ordered an appraisal.
The results flabbergasted everyone.
A Tampa appraiser unfamiliar with Woodlawn valued the property at $315,000 — $60,000 less than the amount the buyer and seller agreed was a fair price. Even the normally conservative property appraiser's office showed the house to be worth $331,000.
Appraisers & Appraisal Management Companies; Requires the Florida Real Estate Appraisal Board to adopt certain rules. Requires application, registration, and renewal fees for appraisal management companies. Requires such companies to register with the DBPR. Requires the fingerprinting and criminal history records checks of, and provides qualifications for, certain persons who control appraisal management companies, etc. EFFECTIVE DATE: 07/01/2010.
- Compel the federal regulator to create a uniform set of standards for AMCs, which may include or build upon TAVMA’s own Standards of Good Practice in Appraisal Management
- Compel AMCs to improve quality as needed to meet the agency’s rules and regulations;
- Flag educational and compliance gaps in AMCs’ systems that they can duly address;
- Encourage AMCs to invest in IT to meet reporting and compliance rules (compliance, record-retention, performance report generation, etc.);
- Provide compliant AMCs with a competitive advantage over those that lag in the compliance area;
- Put AMCs – which at the core act as agents of the lender conducting functions that the lender would otherwise do and be responsible for – under the regulatory auspices of the same entity tasked with overseeing, auditing, and supervising the mortgage lending industry;
- Ensure compliance of AMC product development efforts to consistent and reasoned standards and guidelines; regulatory clarity leads to innovation;
- Provide mortgage lenders a meaningful set of standards against which to assess current and potential AMC partners;
- Level the competitive field while weeding out bad actors; and
- Eliminate the oft-cited objection that AMCs are unregulated.
Interesting list. Would anyone care to address these one-by-one?
Appraiser Active wonders why TAVMA and AMCs are encouraging Federal Regulation now. It's also interesting, given the increasing number of AMCs being created by unsavory individuals with regulatory agency disciplinary history, that protection of the public does not make the list.
Maybe if the Federal government had not demonstrated such an inability to regulate financial institutions and Government Sponsored Enterprises, we would have a bit more enthusiasm for the TAVMA point of view.
Just a few days back cops arrested a man who allegedly phoned death threats to Mayor Bloomberg and Ray Kelly. Now 45-year-old Jack Geoghan of Inter County Appraisers of Bayport, New York, is accused of leaving a message at the Attorney General's office promising, "If that fucker Andrew Cuomo is on the Long Island Expressway and his head is blown off with a 30.06, you'll know who did it." Police did not take this as a crimestoppers tip, and hauled Geoghan in. He is charged with terroristic threats and aggravated harassment.
The father also says that as a real-estate appraiser, Geoghan has been annoyed by Cuomo's attempts to regulate that industry, such as the establishment of a Home Valuation Code of Conduct, which requires appraisal fees be split between appraisers and appraisal management companies, which other critics have denounced, albeit less homicidally, as an undue financial hardship on appraisers.
Dec. 17--A Bayport man charged with threatening to blow off State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's head on the Long Island Expressway might have an easier time getting out of jail after a Central Islip judge reduced his bail Thursday.
Prosecutors said Jack Geoghan, 45, said he planned to "unleash the wrath of God" on Cuomo, vowing: "I am going to track him down and shoot him," court records show.
Geoghan's bail, originally set at $500 million at his arraignment Wednesday in First District Court in Central Islip, was reduced to $50,000 cash or $100,000 bond Thursday by State Supreme Court Judge Carol MacKenzie.
MacKenzie acted after Geoghan's attorney, Bryan E. Cameron of Sayville, petitioned for a bail hearing, arguing the original half-billion-dollar bail was "harsh and excessive."
Let's take a look at the recent job posting for a "Quality Control Reviewer" by StreetLinks. This same job title was advertised back in August, 2009. The link is no longer live, but Appraiser Active discussed the job and StreetLinks in THIS post back then. It appears as though the duties and qualifications have not changed much. The only difference is now a college degree is "preferred" and candidates are Candidates are "required to take and pass the National USPAP Equivalency exam after 90 days of employment and continued education courses are required every 2 years or as the industry dictates."
Sounds GREAT eh? Here are a few more details about the position culled from a posting by a StreetLinks suit:
These are W-2, hourly positions at approx $17/hr plus insurance benefits and continuing education reimbursement. Opportunity for advancement into escalated reviews, appeals, and management.Involves performing an underwriter-style review of appraisal reports with an emphasis on evaluating the appraiser's approach to their value conclusion. StreetLinks' QC reviews take 35-40 minutes on average.
The post cited above is directed to "licensed appraisers". This was the first line:
StreetLinks National Appraisal Services is seeking an additional 30 licensed appraisers for our quality control department in southern Indianapolis.
Does it look to you they intend to use either licensed or unlicensed folks to review appraisals completed in all areas of the country? Does it appear to you these reviews will be done in Indianapolis, Indiana? Is there any license requirement listed in the qualifications? Which state?
Just in case the link disappears, here is the offering.
Florida is not the only state interested in regulating AMCs. Take a look at a recent article from Oregon. The same reasons for regulation apply there, although the article concentrates on another aspect Appraiser Active has addressed previously; stiffing the appraiser on his fee. Here's a couple of excerpts:
Unlike appraisers and mortgage brokers, AMCs are not regulated in Oregon. Their wwners and employees are not required to undergo background checks. The companies are not required to be licensed, bonded or insured.
Solitz, for his part, says he has a good example of the need for new rules: an AMC that appears to be the target of a criminal investigation, one in which Solitz is a complainant.
Solitz has been waiting two months to be paid by Valuation Logistics, a Portland-based AMC that does business with appraisers across the country.
According to an online appraisers forum, some are urging people to share information with Portland police based on reports of appraisers not being paid by the firm. Solitz is one of those cooperating with authorities, saying he has received two phone calls from a Portland police detective in recent days. The detective, Liz Cruthers, declined to comment.
The Better Business Bureau has rated Valuation Logistics with an “F,” or failing grade, citing four complaints involving billing or collection issues that the company either did not resolve or did not respond to.
Public records also show that staff of the agency that regulates Oregon appraisers, the Appraisal Certification and Licensure Board, has brought Valuation Logistics to the attention of the board’s appointed members. Of particular interest was that Olson co-founded the company with a Portland appraiser who has had several run-ins with the state board.
In April 2009, the board suspended that appraiser, Nathan Bernhardt, for six months based on nine violations of appraisal rules.
Asked about Valuation Logistics, Bernhardt said he is no longer involved in the firm but declined to otherwise comment. Other past business partners of Olson also declined to comment.
Public records show that Olson has been involved in other companies before going into the appraisal management business. He also has been under law enforcement scrutiny in the past, including an arrest in Clackamas County for contempt of court in 2007.
In 2005, in an unrelated matter, his participation in a Wilsonville manufacturing firm called Medium Build ended when his two partners accused him of embezzling more than $50,000 as well as transferring a company vehicle to a friend of Olson’s without permission, according to a Clackamas County Sheriff’s Office report.
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.
Though it is early in the process, Freddie Mac said it has seen a tangible improvement in the quality of appraisals of loans it buys since the Home Valuation Code of Conduct took effect.Patricia McClung, Freddie's vice president of offerings management, said at the Mortgage Bankers Association's convention here last week that of the appraisals the government-sponsored enterprise receives, 15% more have come acceptably close to the automated valuation model it runs as a check.
The improved quality of mortgages bought by Freddie and Fannie Mae reduces the repurchase risk for mortgage lenders because of lower defect rates, she said.
Marko Berishaj, a vice president at DartAppraisal.com, a Troy, Mich., management company, said the code is not responsible for a rise in appraisal costs. He cited three factors, including supply and demand: more appraisals ordered but fewer available appraisers. In addition, he said, the cost for appraisers to comply with new certification requirements is being passed along. And finally, the requirement for a market conditions report has also added to expenses.
During a question-and-answer session, one mortgage banker said that in her experience management companies are using out-of-area appraisers to do desk reviews and she has had to educate these people.
Kathy Coon, the chief appraiser at FNC Inc.,** an Oxford, Miss., technology company, replied that if the mortgage banker was using an appraisal management company but had to educate the appraiser it was time to find a different company. But another mortgage banker in the audience countered that, as correspondents, they do not always get to choose which appraisal management company to use. Otherwise, it would be easy to switch, he said.**(Appraiser Active) They can call themselves whatever they want, but they're still an AMC
This is a story of how my $290,000 home was appraised for $115,000.
The tale begins in 2004, when my wife and I decided to buy a three-bedroom, two-bath 1920s bungalow in Ormewood Park in southeast Atlanta. It had been lovingly renovated by the previous owners, who’d also added a new master bedroom and dining room.
The appraiser hired by the lender, Wells Fargo, took measurements and shot several photos as he tromped through our toy-strewn house.
He jotted a few things down on a form and left.
We put it out of our minds until mid-June, when the appraisal results arrived in the mail. I couldn’t believe what I read.
How could our house, purchased just five years before for almost $300,000, be worth just $115,000?
Didn’t the appraiser notice the pristine renovation? The original fireplace? What about the high ceilings, the plantation shutters, hardwood floors, granite counters and the spacious master bath?
Another shock: The $115,000 valuation was far below what our home had sold for in 2002, before being renovated and enlarged.
In the meantime, I scoured the report to try to figure out what had happened.
The appraiser used three recent sales in our area —comparables — to generate what he deemed our house’s market value. But two of those sales were foreclosures. One nearby house had sold “as is” for $129,000. The other, located on a traffic-clogged main street a half-mile and a world away from our quiet street, had gone for just $80,000.
I decided to check on the higher-priced home. Its new owner welcomed me inside and showed off its handsome hardwood floors and shiny stainless-steel appliances. But he laughed when I explained why I showed up on his doorstep.
When he’d bought it, he said, the house was in terrible shape. The floors were covered with damp, mildewed carpet. The water heater was broken. Someone had ripped out and stolen the appliances. The kitchen sink didn’t work.
He’d fixed it up nicely, though it lacked the back porch and dining room our home has. But still, our bank’s appraiser had valued our home much lower than his — before he’d made any improvements.
A Wells Fargo spokesman said the company takes appraisals very seriously.
And while we’re talking about appraisals, Chase Correspondent clients were told that Chase is making changes to their Collateral Policy which became effective October 2. They are eliminating Chase Approved Appraiser status, establishing minimum appraiser requirements, validating review and ineligible appraiser status, and eliminating First American Appraisal Services (eAppraiseIT) as a Chase-approved Appraisal Management Company (AMC). In fact, the Chase Appraiser Web site has been updated to remove all Chase Approved Appraisers.
Correspondents can immediately take advantage of the revised minimum appraiser requirements and validation of Chase Ineligible status. Chase Home Lending will no longer approve, suggest or dictate the use of any specific appraisers. All appraisers with one of the valid state appraisal license/certifications (state license, state certified residential, state certified general) are permitted to complete appraisal services for loan transactions sold to Chase based on loan amount & complexity parameters. (A field review by a State Certified Appraiser is still required when the original appraisal is prepared by an appraiser in a Chase Review status.)
Posts
All Comments
