loss of appraisers and gains in automated valuation tools and

IN THIS ISSUEAppraiser opinions - public records data, listings,, UAD, and 1004MC . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 3What appraisers say about fees, cancelled orders, 2010 vs. 2011, income, assistants . .Page 4UAD problem areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Page 6What is the FDIC suing appraisers about? Some examples of FDIC allegations . . . . .Page 8

Loss of appraisers and gains in automated valuation tools andtechniques signal a shift in the appraisal production model.

But to what?

May 2012–©Appraisal Today–PAGE 1

VOLUME 20 • ISSUE 5 • May 2012

By Jeff Schurman, LeadingCause, LLC

The "to what?" part, I foresee asone of the big conversations over

the next few years.We can argue about it, theorize,

prognosticate, and lay blame. We canbeseech our elected officials for help.We can lay low hoping this too willpass. Meanwhile the traditionalappraisal development model ischanging. For a number of related orconcurrent reasons. Two change dri-vers involve the aging appraiser pop-ulation and the increase in informa-tion technology and online tools forcollecting, organizing, analyzing, andvaluing real estate property.

A March 5, 2012 article inValuation Review, The aging apprais-er: More questions than answers, thematter of who will replace the agingappraiser population seems vexing.Said one appraiser, "The door waswelded shut four years ago and onlythe investors can open it up. Mycompany would have hired 10 peopleover the past three years, but investorrestrictions on trainee involvementwould not allow it. Other appraisalcompany owners have expressed the

same frustration. The market has notbeen able to correct itself." Nor has itbeen able to entice new blood intothe appraisal population to restockthe aging gene pool.

One appraiser suggested an indus-try-supported advertising campaignto get the word out about the benefitsof joining the appraisal professionusing new social media channels. Tome it is a plausible suggestion. Ioften plug the inevitability of socialmedia as the information-to-knowl-edge age replacement to the massmarket approach of old. So I don'tdoubt that a social media campaignwould draw wanted interest.

What about young professionals?Young professionals coming into

the business world today are the firstgeneration of workers who's entirelives have been immersed in infor-mation technology, starting withGame Boy's, Game Cubes, X-Boxes,personal computers, cell phones,

PSPs, Internet access, cloud comput-ing and Smart Phone technology. Soit is natural that we'd reach out to thiscohort to pitch the appraisal profes-sion. The irony is that once theseindividuals, steeped in Googlesearches and the abundance of freeinformation on virtually every topicwithin a few clicks, immerse them-selves in the appraisal businessmodel they'll discover that smarttechnology has penetrated only theperiphery of the appraisal industry.

They'll also assess the threat anddownside opportunity for newappraisers in light of declining mort-gage volumes with little indicationthat they'll ever rebound to the party-like atmosphere of the late '90s andearly 00s. And they'll discern thatautomated valuation models (AVMs),broker price opinions (BPO's) andother lower-end valuation tools haveand will continue to have implica-tions on the supply/demand forappraisers. They'll also be mercilessly

www.appraisaltoday.com

©Appraisal Today–May 2012

regaled by college buddies (via socialmedia of course) with stories of start-ing salaries and signing bonuses inmedical and legal fields. These andother factors (read AMCs) willimpact the future of the youngappraiser. Retirement to sunnierplaces will occupy the older apprais-ers' futures.

The current environment is notconducive to attracting large numbersof young professionals into theappraisal business. I doubt anyonewould seriously dispute this claim.So if the appraiser population contin-ues to decline it will one day dipbelow the relevancy quotient.

What happens when there are notenough appraisers?

What then, lenders? What then,investors? Regulators and legislators?AMCs? Consumer advocates? Whatthen, appraisers?

"Here's how I see it: in 10 years orless, most appraisal work will bedone on the desktop as piecework,and an appraiser in Michigan will belooking at property in Florida," saidBarry Bates in an entertaining yetprescient article for Appraisal Buzzthat is well worth the read."Although the current regulatorymarket is still buying the geocompe-tence argument, it will last only untilthe next big lawsuit where someonetries to collect on the basis of theappraiser living in Clampettown vs.Porterville."

What then, if Barry Bates is right?And if conditions in the appraisalprofession in fact lead to retirementof appraisers without replacements?

Most likely, the appraisal businessmodel will change, I suspect, some-thing along the lines Mr. Bates sug-gests. An insufficient volume of well-paying higher-end appraisal assign-ments will influence downward theappraiser ranks. Retirements and anextended moribund mortgage envi-ronment will only hasten and assurethe decline. AMCs compensatingappraisers less than what they and thenext generation of appraisers need tosurvive in the industry will too. So tothe increasing reliance on alternative(read low cost) valuation products.

Is that good for the mortgagefinance industry? Is a future withoutappraisers OK? Will a future with"some" appraisers doing the workBarry Bates envisions elevate mort-gage finance industry, or hold itback?

It sounds like a scenario planningfest is in order

Some, to their credit, have con-vened Summits to talk about theissues. One I attended a few yearsago seemed more a finger-pointingexercise. That's not a rap against thehost or facilitator; both were sincerein wanting to find common ground.And in fact, we came up with somecollaborative ideas for "next steps" inthe "conversation." Then, either I wassimply not invited back due to a jobchange, or nothing came of the col-laboration exercise. Regardless, weneed to convene more strategic con-versations about the future of theappraisal industry. Or the businessmodel will be decided by the indus-try's replacement.

While we're at it, there should alsobe strategic conversations about theland title abstracting and examinationindustry. Just as appraisers are chal-lenged by aging practitioners and feesand competitive products rendered bynon-carbon-base units so too are titleabstractors. Automation and the abili-ty to generate electronic searches,along with ever-lower fees (some

claim $15-$25 per search), and thelack of new blood threatens to changethat industry's business model.

About the authorJeff Schurman is the executive

director of Leading Causes LLC(www.leadingcauses.com), a leader-ship and business development advi-sory firm that helps mortgage lendersand third-party service providers toassess strategic, operations, reputa-tion, reporting, and compliance risksthat accompany sourcing of realestate mortgage settlement services.He is the editor of the MortgageThird Party Risk Blog (www.mort-gagethirdpartyriskblog.com), and theformer executive director of the TitleAppraisal Vendor ManagementAssociation.


by Steve Costello,AppraisalPort® ProductManager

Editor's note: this article is excerptsfrom the monthly Appraisalportnewsletter. The "I" in these excerptsrefers to the author, Steve Costello,and not to me.

Where do appraisers get publicrecords data?

I want to start by discussing twopolls that asked appraisers about thesources of data they use for comps.We made the assumption that mostappraisers buy data from their localMLS provider to form the basis fortheir research.

So, in the first poll we asked if youpurchase data from a public recorddata provider in addition to MLSdata.

Our assumption turned out to beaccurate with less that 2% of 5,934responders indicating they don't pur-chase MLS data.

However, I was surprised that thetop answer turned out to be "No - Idon't purchase public record data"with 52% of the vote. The "Yes"response wasn't far behind with 46%of the vote.

However, that still means that mostappraisers don't buy any data exceptwhat they get from their MLSprovider.

This outcome resulted in myreceiving many e-mails from con-cerned appraisers asking how anappraiser can do even an adequatejob without also consulting the avail-able public record data. The reasonmay be that many MLS providersinclude public record data with MLSrecords, which may make it unneces-sary for appraisers to buy additional

public data.Based on that premise, the next

poll asked why these appraisers don'tpurchase any additional public recorddata.

The reason doesn't seem to be thatappraisers think the public recorddata is not reliable or useful. Onlyabout 10% of the 4,349 responderschose one of the answers that indicat-ed they don't use it because the datais unreliable or unnecessary.

Most appraisers, more than 86%,have some access to public recorddata. Of these, just over 25% get itfrom their MLS provider, which wasour theory from the above poll.

The big surprise was the numberone answer that indicated they getthe public data for free either on-lineor at the county offices with 33% ofthe vote.

That can probably work well inmany cases, but it could have somelimitations depending on how muchany particular assessor's or recorder'soffice may offer on their website.

Many appraisers also sent me e-mails expressing concern over rely-ing on this "free" public data. Finally,an additional 28% responded thatthey purchase public data from oneof the major providers.

Does the 1004MC add anyadditional credibility?

The next poll asked whether or notthe 1004MC adds any additionalcredibility to the typical residentialappraisal report.

This turned out to be more of asplit decision than was expected.The poll was popular with 6,430votes. The least common responsewas that the 1004MC "almostalways" adds credibility to the reportwith 11% of the total. Another 34%think that it "sometimes" adds credi-

bility. So combining those two responses

we can see that a total of 45% of theappraisers have at least some positiveview of the form. On the flip side, themost common response on the surveywas that it "rarely" adds any credibil-ity with 40% of the vote.

A final 15% stated that the1004MC "never" adds any additionalcredibility to the appraisal. So addingthose last two responses together weend up with about 55% of theappraisers with what I would consid-er an unfavorable opinion of the needto use the 1004MC form.

Do listing comps have any affect onvalue opinion?

The final poll I want to discuss thismonth asked if listing comparableshave any effect on your final opinionof value. We had 5,923 responses andthe opinion seems to lean toward list-ing comps as having some value inthe process.

About a quarter of the appraisers(24%) answered that the listingcomps "almost always" have someeffect on final value. The most com-mon response, with an overwhelming46%, was that the listing comps"sometimes" have an effect on finalvalue. So based on those tworesponses, a combined 70% ofappraisers think that listing compscan be a valuable part of determiningan accurate value.

On the negative side, 22% of theappraisers responded that the listingcomps "rarely" have any effect onfinal value.

The least common answer was thatlisting comps "never" affect the finalvalue and it finished up with 8% ofthe vote. So totaling up the last tworesponses, only 30% of appraisersthink that the listing comps don't

Appraiser opinions - public records data, listings,UAD, and 1004MC

the vast majority of you (around 69%)do everything yourself. Only about18% have part-time help.

We don't know for sure, but myguess is that a lot of that help maycome from family members. Around13% said they have full-time help.

I think that is a much smaller num-ber than we would have seen 10 yearsago. No wonder everyone is feelingoverworked with more to do on eachassignment and less help to get the jobdone.

How did your business do in 2010compared with 2011?

Over the past month our weeklypolls have covered some diverse top-ics. First, we asked how you thinkyour appraisal business did in 2011when compared to 2010. Of the 5,762responses the majority, about 52% felttheir business had done worse in thepast year. However about 35% ofthose responding think they did almostthe same as 2010. 8% reported thatthey had done better by more than25% as compared to 2010. Let's hopemore appraisers can respond with thatanswer next year.

The most common answer was thattheir business has done worse in 2011by somewhere between 11%-25% with19% of the total responses. About 13%had not had a chance to compare thenumber yet.

Have you seen any fee changes?The next two polls I want to discuss

were very similar, but had one big dif-ference. They both asked if you havenoticed any recent change in appraisalfees.

However, the first poll, with 6,142responses, asked if you thought thechange could be attributed directly to

PAGE 4–©Appraisal Today–May 2012

really have much influence on theirfinal value.

Do you think the UAD has beenhelpful or effective in supportingyour value?

No big surprise here with only 5%of the 5,918 respondents answeringthat it does seem to help explain andsupport value.

About 28% think it functions aboutthe same as the old format, while67% think the new format actuallymakes it more difficult to describethe property and support the research.

As we know, the format wasn'tdesigned to help you better supportvalue, but rather to standardize thedata and allow the institutions to bet-ter understand the information youreport.

The problem seems to be thatmany appraisers now feel restrictedin what responses they can enter onthe form and that requires them toadd more information to the reportaddendum in order to explain specif-ic attributes about the subject andcomps. So, for many appraisers, itappears uniform answers are not nec-essarily more accurate or descriptive.

Originally published in theAppraisalPort monthly newsletterReprinted with permission


Editor's note: this article is excerptsfrom the monthly Appraisalportnewsletter. The "I" in these excerptsrefers to the author, Steve Costello,and not to me.

How many orders get cancelled whenyou request a fee increase?

We ran another interesting poll thismonth on a topic unrelated to theother two polls. We asked what per-centage of the time an order has beencancelled or withdrawn due to yourrequest for an increased fee? We had5,107 responses and the answers wereall over the map.

We were surprised to see that thetop answer, with 36% of the vote, was"more than 25%". So apparently morethan a third of appraisers are losingmore than 25% of their businessbecause they believe the fee is too lowto appraise a particular property, sothey ask for an increase.

The second most popular responsewas on the other end of the spectrumwith about 20% stating that they lose1-5% of their orders because of thefee. It was also interesting to see that15% answered that they don't lose anyassignments because of the fee. Wedon't know if that is because they arealways offered a fair fee by theirclients or they just never ask for anincrease.

The balance of the responses, about30%, were split fairly evenly amongfour bracketed answers, with a lossrate ranging from 6% to 25%.

Do you have any assistance (notincluding other appraisers)?

This poll had 6,129 responses and

What appraisers say about - fees,cancelled orders, 2010 vs. 2011,

hourly income, and assistants


the Dodd-Frank Act while the secondpoll, with 5,430 responses, asked ifyou thought there had been "anychange in fees attributable to any rea-son."

The results of both polls turned outto be almost identical. Around 5%think there has been an increase ofless than $25, while 9% think theyhave seen an increase of $25-$50.Only about 4% think they have seenany increase in fees of more than $51.

After that, it was all downhill withthe majority (about 70%) seeing nochange in fees for any reason. Thefinal 12% have actually seen adecrease in fees or just were not surewhich way fees were going.

So, does this mean that the smallnumber of appraisers who have seensome fee increases attribute it to theDodd-Frank Act? That is hard to sayfor sure because the increases weresmall and it may be difficult to saywhat caused a slight fee adjustmenton any given assignment.

What I think we can say from thesepolls is that generally fees don't seemto be going anywhere very fast.

How many appraisers plan in renewingat their next expiration date?

We had a total of 6,625 responsesand I was surprised to see that only71% of appraisers said they will defi-nitely renew. We have lost manyappraisers over the past few years andit looks as if that trend is going tocontinue.

About 15% said it isn't worth it torenew, while fewer than 3% are goingto retire. About 11% haven't decidedwhat to do.

Maybe the business environmentwill improve and they will decide tostick around.

Editor comment: don't give up yourappraisal license!!

How many hours per week doappraisers work?

I have heard from many appraiserslately who mention that it now takesmuch longer to complete an appraisal

with the UAD format. The UAD is justthe latest in a string of requirementsthat have been given to appraisers overthe past several years. Curious aboutall of this, we ran some polls lastmonth to try and get some kind of feelfor how much time appraisers arespending to get all their work out thedoor.

In the first poll we simply askedhow many hours per week you spenddoing appraisals. This poll was verypopular with 6,718 responses.

The top answer of 51-60 hours perweek received nearly one-third of thevotes.

The answers representing numbersover 60 hours worked per week alsopulled in some substantial votes with61-70 hours getting 17% and over 70hours ending up with nearly 14% ofthe vote. That means that around 900of those responding are working over70 hours per week, and we don't knowhow much over 70 hours – it could bea substantial number.

Less than 5% of you work under 30hours.

A combined total of 33% of apprais-ers fall into what many consider the"normal" work week ranges with theresponse of 31-40 hours ending upwith 9% of the vote and the responseof 41-50 hours rounding out the groupwith a solid 24% of the vote.

How much do appraisers make perhour?

With all those hours being worked,we thought it would be interesting tosee what appraisers felt they actuallymake when converted to an hourlywage.

This poll had a total of 6,248responses and they were fairly evenlyspread out between the eight differentanswers with a decline in responses asthe amount per hour increased up untilthe final response of "$46 or more perhour" which turned out to be the topsingle response with 22% of the vote.

By contrast, about 11% of appraiserschose the lowest response of $1-$10per hour. The people in that group

must really be struggling and workingreally long hours.

Moving up from the lowest response,and grouping the next three responsestogether, we can see that the lower val-ues between $11- $30 per hour pulledin about 42% of the vote.

The next three higher responses rep-resent a range from $31-$45 per hourhad a respectable response with 25%of the vote.

The numbers from that poll stillseemed pretty low for a profession thattakes years of study, work and intern-ships to even get into the business.

How much do appraisers think theyshould make per hour?

So that made us ask what you think,in theory, residential appraisers shouldearn when converted to an hourly fig-ure. We had 6,128 responses and avery interesting pattern emerged.

The responses formed a nearly per-fect bell curve except for the finalresponse of "more than $90 per hour"which turned out to be tied for the topanswer with 24% of the vote.

At $90 per hour and just a 40 hourwork week about a quarter of youthink a residential appraiser shouldmake over $187,000 per year. Thatwould make it a very nice living, andI'm sure many more people would betrying to enter the profession if thatwere the case.

Tied for the top answer with 24% ofthe vote was $51-$60 per hour, and itrepresents the middle of the curve.

Combining the three responses onthe lower side of the curve created arange of $21-$50 per hour and it pulledin 25% of the vote while combiningthe three responses on the higher sideof the curve created a range of $61-$90per hour which pulled about 27% ofthe vote.



er score, but these projects are stillway down the road. The focus fornow seems to be on getting the bugsout of the system and continuing toeducate appraisers on the best way tocomplete a UAD-compliant appraisalreport.

The discussion then moved to morespecific details concerning what theappraiser should and should not dowhen completing a UAD-compliantappraisal.

Main issue - uniform description ofa comp

One point was addressed by all thepresenters and seemed to be the maintheme of the presentation: that theappraiser must maintain a uniformdescription of a comp when thatsame comp is used in differentappraisals.

What has shown up in the analysisof the data is a variation in the com-parable property descriptions usedfrom appraisal to appraisal. Thisoccurs when the same appraiser usesthe same comps for differentappraisals.

While this is normal and expected,the description of, and ratings givento the comps, should not change fromappraisal to appraisal.

First, the ratings applied to a compshould be "absolute" and not "rela-tive" to the subject being appraised.The GSEs are seeing examples of acomp rated as a C3 in one appraisaland then as a C2 by the sameappraiser a week later in a differentappraisal.

Second, these discrepancies are notjust limited to the ratings. This is alsohappening with some of the basicdata about the comp, such as the liv-ing area, lot size, bedrooms, bath-rooms, etc. The same appraisershould not list a comp as 2,428 sq. ft.in one appraisal and then as 1,600 sq.ft. in another. The GSEs understand


On April 4, 2012, the AppraisalInstitute sponsored a two-hour webi-nar titled, "UAD Aftereffects: AreYou Really UAD Compliant?" Iattended this webinar to bring yousome of the important highlights.The knowledgeable speakers includ-ed: Robert Murphy, Director ofProperty Valuation and Eligibility atFannie Mae; Steven Feyerick SRA,Director of Collateral Policy atFreddie Mac; AJ Jackson, VicePresident and District Manager ofLandSafe Appraisal Services; andDawn M. Molitor-Gennrich SRA, apartner at Heyn, Molitor-Gennrich,LLC.

In the first part of the program, thespeakers discussed why the UniformAppraisal Dataset (UAD) is nowrequired by the government-spon-sored enterprises (GSEs) Fannie Maeand Freddie Mac.

GSEs will use the UAD to analyzeappraisal data

The bottom line is that GSEs wanta better understanding of the data inthe loan documents, including theappraisal. Prior to UAD, they didn'tsee the appraisal unless there was aproblem with a specific property thatneeded a closer look.

The UAD, which is a part of themuch larger Uniform Mortgage DataProgram (UMDP), enables the GSEsto systematically review the data onevery house that supports one oftheir loans. The plan is to eventuallyapply risk management analytics toall the appraisals and even supplylenders with feedback on what theysee.

They would also like to develop(both) an appraisal score and apprais-

that an appraiser may receive addi-tional information about a compproperty over time and change somedata, but this should be the rareexception to the rule.

UAD problem areasThe panel then discussed some of

the most common problem areas forappraisers when completing a UADappraisal. All agreed that this newUAD format will most likely requiremore written explanation from theappraiser. For example, not all prop-erties are going to fit exactly into thenew quality and condition ratingtiers. Appraisers are encouraged toadd as much narrative as necessary toexplain why a property may differslightly from the standard rating thatwas noted on the form.

UAD problem areas


Here are some items that seem to becausing trouble for appraisers:* Missing license number – be sureto enter it as it appears on theASC.gov website.* Missing date of appraisal – thisdoesn't have to be the same, and inmost cases won't be the same, as thedate of inspection.* Missing final appraised value – ithappens more than you think!* Confusion about the level of workcompleted for kitchen and bathroomupdating and remodeling – what isupdated vs. remodeled (see pages 19-20 in Appendix D - link below)- Confusion about what timeframe toselect for completed work(updated/remodeled kitchen/bath)when work was completed at varioustimes. (see pages 19-20 in AppendixD - link below)* Full, ¾, and ½ baths not enteredproperly. Full and ¾ baths are addedtogether and entered as one numberand the total number of ½ baths isentered as a separate number.* Lot size should be entered in"square feet" for areas less than anacre and in "acres" for lots one acreor larger; it is the correct procedure ifyou find it necessary to enter a lotsize value in square feet for oneproperty and in acres for a differentproperty on the same report.

Let your forms software do as muchformatting as possible

The panel also advised that theappraiser should let the appraisalsoftware format as much of the infor-mation in the form as possible.

They also advised not to force non-system generated additions of text,symbols, spaces, etc., as this cancause a rejection due to a formattingproblem.

It is also highly recommend thatevery appraisal be run through theappraisal software's UAD compliancechecker before attempting submis-sion.

The bottom lineThe presentation's primary take-

away: the appraiser should followinstructions supplied by the GSEs asclosely as possible.

The presenters referred to the"UAD Field Specification: AppendixD" many times. https://www.efan-niemae.com/sf/lqi/umdp/pdf/uadap-pendixdfieldreqs.pdf

This link is a just released updateto Appendix D: https://www.efan-niemae.com/sf/lqi/umdp/pdf/uad-newsletter.pdf

Another useful document forappraisers is the frequently askedquestions (FAQs) which can beviewed here: https://www.efan-niemae.com/sf/lqi/umdp/pdf/uad-faqs.pdf

These items are frequently updat-ed, so check back often to see if any-thing has changed.


By Peter Christensen

Editor’s comment: Yow!!Almost all of us would beguilty... or named....

The FDIC continues to sue residen-tial appraisers in connection withorigination appraisals and reviewappraisals performed for failedlenders between 2003-2009 on loansnow in default. It may be helpful, orscary, for appraisers and AMCs to seefor themselves exactly what kinds ofalleged USPAP violations or othererrors the FDIC is claiming in law-suits against appraisers. Therefore, Ihave copied below the FDIC's actualallegations against several appraisers.These are word-for-word the entiretyof the FDIC's claimed errors againstthese appraiser defendants. Pleasedon't shoot the messenger. I'm alawyer, not a USPAP expert, but evenI know some of these things aren'treally "USPAP violations" despite theFDIC's allegations.

The FDIC's favorite alleged "USPAPviolations" or other alleged errors inits most recent cases have been:

"USPAP required that [the apprais-er] analyze whether the level ofappreciation was sustainable;"

The comparable is "more than onemile from the subject property;" and

The comparable "involved a salethat was more than six months old."

Even though the complaints filed bythe FDIC in court are all public docu-ments, I've chosen to conceal theappraisers' names because I don'tthink the focus should be on whothey are -- they could be any of tensof thousands of appraisers who deliv-

ered appraisals to failed lenders nowunder FDIC receivership.

Again, the portions of the FDIC'scomplaints I've provided below areword-for-word the entirety of theFDIC's claimed errors in the lawsuitcomplaints against these appraiserdefendants. In other words, I'm notcherry-picking from the FDIC's alle-gations or taking them out of con-text. (In fact, if we looked at the fullcontext of the loan transactions inthese lawsuits, the complete storiesinvolve borrower and mortgage bro-ker misrepresentations about occu-pancy, employment and income.)

1. FDIC v. Appraiser (in Black):(See above)

In this 2011 case, the FDIC sued theappraiser for alleged professionalnegligence relating to appraisals fortwo loans extended in 2005. TheFDIC demanded $518,000 in dam-ages against the appraiser. Beloware the FDIC's allegations about thealleged errors in one of theappraisals:


What is the FDIC Suing Appraisers About? Some Examples of the FDIC's Specific Allegations


2. FDIC v. Appraiser (in Black)and Review Appraiser (in Red):

In this 2011 case, the FDIC sued theappraiser for alleged professionalnegligence relating to an appraisalfor a loan extended in 2005. TheFDIC alleged damages of $554,821against the appraiser. The FDIC alsosued a review appraiser in connec-tion with a review of the firstappraiser's report and for failing toidentify the alleged issues in theoriginal report. To the right are theFDIC's allegations about the allegederrors in the appraisal and review:

without review.


3. FDIC v. Appraiser (in Black) andReview Appraiser (in Red):

In this 2011 case, the FDIC sued theappraiser for alleged professional neg-ligence relating to an appraisal for aloan extended in 2005. The FDICalso sued an appraiser who performeda field review agreeing with the valuestated in the first report. The FDICsought damages of $301,398 againstboth appraisers. Below are theFDIC's allegations about the allegederrors in the appraisal and review:


4. FDIC v. Appraiser (in Black):

In this 2011 case, the FDIC sued theappraiser for alleged professionalnegligence relating to an appraisal fora loan extended in 2005. The FDICalleged damages of $310,839 againstthe appraiser. Below are the FDIC'sallegations about the alleged errors inthe appraisal:

Appraisal TodayISSN 1066–3900

Appraisal Today is published 12 times per year by Real Estate Communication Resources.

Subscription rate: $99 per year, $169 - 2 yearsPublisher

Ann O'Rourke, MAI, SRA, [email protected]

Subscriber ServicesTheresa Lua

M,T,W 7AM to noonFriday 7AM to 9 AM (Pacific time)[email protected] (24 x 7)

CirculationHancock Mailing Service

Editorial and Subscription Offices2033 Clement Ave., Suite 105

Alameda, CA 94501 Phone: 1-800-839-0227Fax: 1–800–839–0014

Email: [email protected]

Appraisal Today is sold with the understanding that the publisher,editors, and others associated with the publication are not engagedin rendering accounting, legal, or other professional services. Itdoes not attempt to offer specific solutions to individual problems.Questions about specific issues should be referred to the appropri-ate professional for analysis. ©2012 by Real Estate Communication Resources. All rightsreserved. The contents of this publication may not be reproducedeither whole or in part without consent.


6. FDIC v. Appraiser (in Black):

In this 2011 case, the FDIC sued theappraiser for alleged professionalnegligence relating to an appraisal fora loan extended in 2005. The FDICalleged damages of $103,165 againstthe appraiser. Below are the FDIC'sallegations about the alleged errors inthe appraisal:

MBA Loan Volume Application Index – 1/10 to 4/12

0.0

200.0

400.0

600.0

800.0

1000.0

1200.0

1400.0

1600.0

Jan-10

Feb-10

Mar-10

Apr-10

May-10

Jun-10

Jul-10

Aug-10

Sep-10

Oct-10

Nov-10

Dec-10

Jan-11

Feb-11

Mar-11

Apr-11

May-11

Jun-11

Jul-11

Aug-11

Sep-11

Oct-11

Nov-11

Dec-11

Jan-12

Feb-12

Mar-12

Apr-12

Market Index Base = 100 in 1990


5. FDIC v. Appraiser (in Black)and Review Appraiser (in Red):

In this 2011 case, the FDIC sued theappraiser for alleged professionalnegligence relating to an appraisalfor a loan extended in 2006. TheFDIC alleged damages of $283,521against the appraiser. The FDIC alsosued a review appraiser because "shefailed to note or comment upon anyof the USPAP violations." Below arethe FDIC's allegations about thealleged errors in the appraisal andreview:

loss of appraisers and gains in automated valuation tools and

Documents