Working RE Online - www.workingre.com
Reaching over 60,000 Real Estate Professionals   Published by OREP - E&O Insurance Experts
Decoding Customary
and Reasonable Fees


WRE Current Edition - HVCC: Appraiser Last Laugh?
Click to Read New Issue
 

Stop Retyping MLS Data - http://www.bradfordsoftware.com

ClickFORMS is the simple answer
to your complex appraisal
software needs. We offer multiple
sketcher integrations, MLS integration, and easy
payment options.

Call today at 800-622-8727 or visit
http://www.bradfordsoftware.com
to try before you buy.






Appraisal Institute: Landmark Text on Appraising Easements

New requirements take effect Sept. 1, 2011!

Understand the new Uniform Mortgage Data Program (UMPD) requirements for residential appraisers to effectively complete and transmit an appraisal report to a lender client. Learn the details behind the UMPD, including information about the Uniform Appraisal Dataset and Uniform Collateral Data Portal. Register now!






Live CE Webinars

...A smart way to earn CE...

 

Featured webinars

  

First Look
Find out how the new Uniform Appraisal Dataset from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will affect your reporting. 

 

Residential Design: What makes a good house good?
You'll never look at a house the same way again!

 

Learn more: 
www.nmu.edu/LiveCE1 





Printed (mailed) and Electronic (emailed) Guides Available. Discount for OREP Members/Affiliates. Click for details.

 








The online course Essential Elements of Disclosures and Disclaimers is offered to OREP Members/Affiliates for administrative costs, and for a limited time, to Working RE readers at a discount. Click for details.

 

Customary and Reasonable Fees Survey Results Now Available. Click to Download.
 

“I save your magazines and reference them when issues arise within the industry or my residential appraisal business. I find your publication to be very informative and worthy of archiving for future referencing.”
-Edward Rossi, State Certified  Appraiser

 

Working RE
Delivers Appraisers

80,000 Print * 61,000 Email

 

 Most respected, cost-effective choice for reaching appraisers.

Advertise:
dbrauner@workingre.com

"Working RE is one of the best sources of contemporary information available to appraisers.  I look forward to receiving it and digest it from cover to cover.  Most of the appraisers feel as I do, in that your work does us a great service and is sincerely appreciated." - Paul J. Caristi, SRPA, SRA

 

Related Stories


Current Issue (free access)

- Decoding Customary and Reasonable Fees

 

Sidebar
- Dodd-Frank Act

Health Care Options
 

Opt-In Home Inspectors Edition (free)

 

Editorial Mission: Help readers grow as professionals and as business people.  

Send your Story/Idea to the Editor
Send Comments  
Advertising Inquiries
Customer Service

If you enjoy WRE Online, please forward to a colleague. 

 

March 30, 2011   Vol. 220

Award Winner • Publication Excellence


Become our fan on Facebook

Follow workingremag on Twitter 

Click to Print

 

Leave your comments on this story at the bottom.

Click to send your Story/Idea to the Editor.

 

New: Customary and Reasonable Fee Survey: The OREP/Working RE survey now has over 12,000 responses. If you have participated pat yourself on the back - your input matters. If you have not participated yet, the survey is ongoing. You can add your fee data here:  www.surveymonkey.com/s/YZWHYT3. Find a link to initial results in sidebar. (Closed)
 

Take our other surveys:
HVCC - One Year On (Closed)
HVCC Appraiser Talkback Survey (Closed)
Visit our Appraiser Talkback blog for past articles.


 

Editor’s Note: Attorneys at the Federal Reserve Board point to where and how to challenge low fees.  Meanwhile, the OREP.org/Working RE survey of Customary and Reasonable Fees surpasses the 12,000 mark.
 

Challenging Low Fees

By David Brauner, Editor


As the April 1 implementation date of Dodd-Frank looms, attorneys at the Federal Reserve direct appraisers to a method for challenging low fees (see last issue:
Customary Fees: Good, Bad and Uncertain, at WorkingRE.com, Premium Content). Here’s where to find the information.  

According to Federal Reserve Board attorneys, Section 312(c) of Dodd-Frank (reprinted below), lays out which agencies regulate which types of transactions- this is the “where” to properly file complaints. It revises section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act.  

Section 1100 (A)(8) of Dodd-Frank (below) sheds light on the authority under which provisions of the Act are enforced. This Section revises the enforcement provisions of the Truth in Lending Act (with cross references the FDI Act), according to a Board spokesperson.

 

With implementation of Dodd-Frank only a few days away a new chapter begins. A Federal Reserve Board attorney told WRE in a recent interview that according to the Interim Final Rule (IFR) recent market fees do not necessarily meet the first presumption of compliance (customary).  The Board attorney said, “Someone can rebut the presumption(s) of compliance with evidence that a fee is not reasonable or customary for a reason other than a condition addressed in a presumption of compliance. What evidence supports an allegation depends on the facts and circumstances of a particular case. The rule addresses compensation paid in a particular geographic market.’” (Read the article here: Fed Board Update: Customary and Reasonable Fees.)

 

The language addressing how and where to rebut low fees is reprinted below. In an interview at the release of the IFR, a Board attorney also pointed to the following language from the IFR, which she seemed to interpret as also reinforcing the notion that recent fees do not necessarily meet the “customary” test under the first presumption: “[T]he Board understands that some AMCs have begun requiring fee appraisers to agree that the fee is ‘customary and reasonable’ as a condition of obtaining the appraisal assignment. In these situations, the Board believes that an appraiser’s agreement that a fee is 'customary and reasonable' is an unreliable measure of whether the fee in fact meets the statutory standard."

 

Appraisers are reporting, with greater regularity now as we move nearer to the Dodd-Frank implementation date, receiving inquiries from AMCs as to what their “customary and reasonable fees” will be come April 1. Many appraisers are tapping into the Working RE/OREP.org survey results for data. The penalties for noncompliance are stiff: $10,000 for each day any such violation continues and $20,000 civil penalties for subsequent violations. For many appraisers, of course, a return to customary and reasonable fees means staying in business.

It remains to be seen whether the appeal process laid out in the Act will serve its purpose or be just another bureaucratic black hole. In related news, the National Association of Mortgage Brokers recently filed a lawsuit in federal court against the Fed seeking an injunction to postpone new rules set to take effect April 1 that no longer allow brokers to earn a bigger commission for giving a customer a loan with a higher interest rate. (To learn more, click here.)


(story continues below)

 

OREP - www.orep.orgE&O Insurance Experts
Coverage, Service, Rates

Minimum Premium $455

Now in our 10th year! 


Appraisers * Inspectors
Agents/Brokers * Mortgage Field Service
 

Save Time and Money

Call Today - We Answer the Phone!

info@orep.org / 888-347-5273


Working RE - www.workingre.com Insurance includes Subscription & Discounts

 

David Brauner Insurance Services/ OREP/Working RE Magazine

David Brauner Calif. Insurance License: 0C89873 

 

(story continues)

 

For anyone not paying attention over the last two years about why the issue of fair fees is vital to the industry and the public, the following two letters, received within the last week, are representative of many thousands of others.

 

HVCC History Lesson

I am an independent fee appraiser in the state of California. I began my appraisal career as a trainee back in 2001 and immediately fell in love with the business. I was excited about learning all I could about the industry and how to become a better appraiser. I pride myself at being an ethical, hard-working appraiser and I have turned down many jobs because the requests made of me were unethical and, at times, illegal.

 

When the economy began to turn my work slowed. I started my own appraisal business shortly after receiving my Certification and worked hard to build up my client base. I could have had a much larger client base and significantly more work had I been willing to compromise my ethics but I was not willing to do this. Within a year I had more than 30 clients I was performing appraisals for on a regular basis and my business began to build steam. Then it hit – HVCC.  Literally overnight everything ground to a halt. For nearly a year I couldn't find any work whatsoever. I found myself in the unfortunate position of having to solicit work from AMCs.  From the moment I began taking work for these AMCs my fees dropped dramatically. I tried in vain to stand firm for a fair fee but it was no use, the AMCs could simply wait me out. I had to eat. I had to keep a roof over my head. 

So I had to start accepting lower and lower fees. The fee I am paid for an SFR is typically between $195 and $235, a far cry from the minimum $350 I used to make and nowhere near the amount the AMCs invoice their customers for the appraisals I perform, which are typically at least $450 to $800 or more.
 

From every AMC that I tried to get a slightly higher fee from (and not even coming close to what I used to make), my work load got lighter and lighter, sending a clear message that if I wanted to receive work I would have to underbid my fellow appraisers, despite consistent raving reviews from these AMCs about the high quality of my work. One of the AMCs that I receive work from flat out told me that the fee I quote is the deciding factor in whether or not I receive an order! This is unconscionable. The AMCs do not appear to be concerned with a quality report but rather with which appraiser will perform the appraisal at the lowest cost. One AMC that sends me orders went so far as to force me to sign a form stating that the fees they pay me are fair and customary.  If I did not agree to this I would receive no more work from that company!

 

Something must be done and I am wondering why the appraisers of California don't organize. If we could all agree on a certain date, the moment from which every single appraiser in California refuses to accept any fee less than $375 for a basic SFR and $750 for a 2-4 Multi-unit, including additional fees based on complexity and etc., within one or two months the AMCs would have absolutely no choice but to begin to pay us a fair fee.  It is time for appraiser's to realize how powerful our voices are when we stand together! If we do not stand together, I fear our industry and the quality of our product will continue to diminish. - J in California (Please ensure that I remain completely anonymous.)

 

(story continues below) 

 

 

(story continues)
 

Efficiency Fatigue

I’ve been appraising residential property in Western North Carolina for ten years.  Prior to becoming an appraiser, I was a manufacturing engineering manager responsible for eliminating wasted time from processes so  cost savings could be passed to customers.  I’ve yet to find ways to significantly reduce times associated with appraisals that would justify fee reductions to the levels being paid in today’s market.  While lenders and AMCs force appraisers to accept lower fees, enabling them to maintain or increase profit margins, they do not realize the impact on appraisers’ abilities to maintain respectable profit margins. They continually search for the lowest fee rather than searching for the most qualified appraiser, while assuming their ability to ensure an appraisal report meets standards, will eliminate the possibility of negative impact to the lender and consumer. The question is, who is controlling our profession?  

My research of cost of living and business indexes reveals that in the past ten years, costs have increased by as much 20-25 percent.  However, a $350 paid in 2000 is now, in some cases, $175.  My math tells me that today’s reasonable fee should be in the $420-$438 range.  The result for the appraisal profession is a 70 percent fee reduction rather than a 25 percent increase.

 

Experienced appraisers are not providing opportunity to new appraisers (entering the profession as trainees) for several reasons. Here are but a few. 

1)       Trainees are paid lower fees than AMCs offer.  After becoming licensed, former trainees can realize an increase in wage, even though the fee they receive is below par.

2)       A trainee is an expense that reduces profit.  The fast-paced environment created by AMCs demands an appraisal firm provide quick response to meet client needs and expectations. Trainees slow the process.

3)       Trainees become the competition. 

Educational requirements for appraisers are more extensive today than in the past.  Appraisers are now required to have two and four year degrees to enter the profession.  The majority of appraisers in our profession are in their 40s and 50s or older. Younger individuals are veering away from appraising, refusing to enter a profession where there is no potential to obtain wages that coincide with the level of education they possess. Years from now, as the number of appraisers decreases due to attrition, the demand will become greater, which will likely force higher fees.

 

Today’s appraisers do not realize their value in the lending process. Many appraisers in our profession have no knowledge of operating a viable, profitable business. I do not defend AMCs but they did not create the fee issues we face today.  Appraisers created this problem.  We have always had the ability to say “NO” and refuse to work for low fees.  And, if we all refused, lending institutions and AMCs would have no choice but to pay what we demand.  – David in NC

 

Challenging Low Fees
Section 312(c) of Dodd-Frank

 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 3 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813) is amended—

(1) in subsection (q), by striking paragraphs (1) through (4) and inserting the following:

‘‘(1) the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, in the case of—

‘‘(A) any national banking association; ‘‘

(B) any Federal branch or agency of a foreign bank; and

‘‘(C) any Federal savings association;

‘‘(2) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, in the case of—

‘‘(A) any State nonmember insured bank;

‘‘(B) any foreign bank having an insured branch; and

‘‘(C) any State savings association;

‘‘(3) the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, in the case of—

‘‘(A) any State member bank;

‘‘(B) any branch or agency of a foreign bank with respect to any provision of the Federal Reserve Act which is made applicable under the International Banking Act of 1978;

‘‘(C) any foreign bank which does not operate an insured branch;

‘‘(D) any agency or commercial lending company other than a Federal agency;

‘‘(E) supervisory or regulatory proceedings arising from the authority given to the Board of Governors under section 7(c)(1) of the International Banking Act of 1978, including such proceedings under the Financial Institutions Supervisory Act of 1966;

‘‘(F) any bank holding company and any subsidiary (other than a depository institution) of a bank holding company; and

‘‘(G) any savings and loan holding company and any subsidiary (other than a depository institution) of a savings and loan holding company.’’; and

(2) in paragraphs (1) and (3) of subsection (u), by striking ‘‘(other than a bank holding company’’ and inserting ‘‘(other than a bank holding company or savings and loan holding company’’.


Section 1100 (A) (8) of the Dodd-Frank Act

(8) in section 108 (15 U.S.C. 1604), by adding at the end the following:

(A) by striking subsection (a) and inserting the following:

‘‘(a) ENFORCINGAGENCIES.—Subject to subtitle B of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, compliance with the requirements imposed under this title shall be enforced under—

 ‘‘(1) section 8 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, by the appropriate Federal banking agency, as defined in section 3(q) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1813(q)), with respect to—

‘‘(A) national banks, Federal savings associations, and Federal branches and Federal agencies of foreign banks;

‘‘(B) member banks of the Federal Reserve System (other than national banks), branches and agencies of foreign banks (other than Federal branches, Federal agencies, and insured State branches of foreign banks), commercial lending companies owned or controlled by foreign banks, and organizations operating under section 25 or 25A of the Federal Reserve Act; and

‘‘(C) banks and State savings associations insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (other than members of the Federal Reserve System), and insured State branches of foreign banks;

‘‘(2) the Federal Credit Union Act, by the Director of the National Credit Union Administration, with respect to any Federal credit union;

‘‘(3) the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, by the Secretary of Transportation, with respect to any air carrier or foreign air carrier subject to that Act;

 ‘‘(4) the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921 (except as pro-vided in section 406 of that Act), by the Secretary of Agriculture, with respect to any activities subject to that Act;

‘‘(5) the Farm Credit Act of 1971, by the Farm Credit Administration with respect to any Federal land bank, Federal land bank association, Federal intermediate credit bank, or production credit association; and

‘‘(6) subtitle E of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, by the Bureau, with respect to any person subject to this title.’’; and

 (B) by striking subsection (c) and inserting the following:

‘‘(c) OVERALL ENFORCEMENT AUTHORITY OF THEF EDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.—Except to the extent that enforcement of the requirements imposed under this title is specifically committed to some other Government agency under any of paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (a), and subject to subtitle B of the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, the Federal Trade Commission shall be authorized to enforce such requirements. For the purpose of the exercise by the Federal Trade Commission of its functions and powers under the Federal Trade Commission Act, a violation of any requirement imposed under this title shall be deemed a violation of a requirement imposed under that Act. All of the functions and powers of the Federal Trade Commission under the Federal Trade Commission Act are available to the Federal Trade Commission to enforce compliance by any person with the requirements under this title, irrespective of whether that person is engaged in commerce or meets any other jurisdictional tests under the Federal Trade Commission Act.’’
 

You can find the entire Dodd-Frank Act at WorkingRE.com; Sidebar.

 

About the Author

David Brauner is Editor of Working RE magazine and Senior Broker at OREP.org, a leading provider of E&O Insurance for appraisers, inspectors and other real estate professionals in 49 states (OREP.org). He has covered the appraisal profession for over 16 years. He can be contacted at dbrauner@orep.org or (888) 347-5273. Calif. Insurance Lic. #0C89873. 

 

 

Click to send your Story/Idea to the Editor

 

 

 

HTML Comment Box is loading comments...


 If you have questions, please email subscription@workingre.com.

Working RE Home OREP for Appraisers E&O Insurance