Oregon Board Sanctions AMC

12
WRE, Working RE Magazine, Appraiser News, Appraiser Magazine, Real Estate Appraisers, Volume 35
>> See Past News Editions
>> Click to Print
> Expert’s Guide to Defensible Workfile
“Bulletproof” your workfile, protect your license and your livelihood with this expert help. Make your time count: learn quick tips from an expert on how to produce highly defensible reports that keep you safe and raise the quality of your product. Click now. 

> Do You Do FHA Appraisals?
Enjoy Better, More Efficient FHA Appraising
FHA Checklist and eBook  keeps you up-to-date on FHA requirements, makes you more efficient on FHA Inspections and helps keep you off their “do not use” list. This user-friendly Guide is a fast and inexpensive tool for producing higher quality FHA reports more quickly. Click now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Editor’s Note: The Oregon Board’s case against the AMC AEC and its owner Michael Fried is indicative of a broader move by state appraiser boards to enforce these new AMC regulations.

Oregon Board Sanctions AMC
by Isaac Peck, Associate Editor

Despite a flurry of new regulations placed on both lenders and appraisal management companies (AMCs) regarding how they are allowed to manage appraisers, many in this profession are still asking: who is enforcing the rules?

On the federal level, the Dodd-Frank Act says that a violation of appraiser independence, by either a lender or its agent, mandates a $10,000 fine per day, as long as the violation exists. On the state level, many appraiser boards have passed AMC regulations mandating that appraisers be paid within 30 or 60 days after completion of an appraisal. Louisiana has gone a step further and authorized its Appraiser Board to sanction AMCs that do not pay Customary and Reasonable fees.

And yet, despite all these regulations meant to protect appraisers, the number of fines or disciplinary actions levied against lenders or AMCs for violating appraiser independence or failing to pay appraisers on time is a very short list.

However, appraisers have reason to be encouraged. Recently, state boards have begun answering the call for enforcement, with North Carolina’s State Appraiser Board recently sanctioning two AMCs for violating that state’s AMC requirement that appraisers be paid within 30 days- Residential RealEstate Review and Coester Valuation Management Services.

The latest instance of an AMC being sanctioned for bad behavior comes from Oregon, where the owner and CEO of The Appraisal Express Corporation (AEC), Michael J. Fried, has been assessed a civil penalty of $87,500 for operating an unlicensed AMC in the state and failing to pay appraisers in a timely fashion. This represents one of the largest fines against an AMC or its owner to-date, and indicates to both appraisers and AMCs that, the Oregon Board at least, is taking action to enforce the rules and protect appraisers.

(story continues below)

(story continues)

The Complaint
Founded in California, the now defunct AEC was a relatively small AMC that ordered appraisals throughout California, Oregon, Louisiana, Washington and Indiana, according to the Oregon Appraiser Board’s findings of fact. The initial complaint against AEC was filed by an anonymous appraiser in June 2012. It notified the Oregon Appraiser Board that AEC was operating as an AMC in Oregon without a license. Throughout the Board’s investigation, it was later revealed that the appraiser who filed the complaint was actually a California appraiser who was upset that AEC had not paid her for appraisal work.

Upon receiving the complaint, the Oregon Board immediately contacted AEC and requested a list of all Oregon appraisers on its panel, a list of all of AEC’s clients, and a copy of all appraisal orders AEC had received from January 2011 to June 2012.

In the course of its investigation, the Board alleges that AEC ordered 94 appraisals in the state of Oregon without possessing a valid AMC license and, still owed 12 appraisers $9,915 in unpaid appraisal fees. The Board advised Fried that the maximum disciplinary action per violation is a civil penalty of $15,000. With 94 alleged violations, the total civil penalty could be as high as $1,410,000.

In his response, Fried made a plea for leniency asking the Board to “please consider a warning” instead of more punitive measures.

(story continues below)
OREP Appraiser E&O Insurance

(story continues)

Administrative Hearing
In December 2013, an administrative hearing was held regarding the proposed civil penalty to be assessed against AEC and Fried. The Board cited its authority and responsibility to ensure that AMCs and their “controlling persons” comply with state law, indicating that it would be pursuing disciplinary actions against both the AMC AEC and Fried as a “controlling person,” which it defines as “an owner, officer, or director of an appraisal management company.”

Under Oregon law, because AEC is a corporation, it must be represented by an attorney licensed to practice law in the state of Oregon. However, only Fried was present at the December 2013 hearing. No attorney was present to represent AEC in the case, leading to a default judgment against them.

According to the Default Final Order issued by the Board, Fried represented himself in his own case and defended his actions by arguing that the Oregon Board moved too quickly to enact laws regulating AMCs and that the Board “did not give consideration to the financial impact the law would have on small companies” like AEC. At his hearing, Fried also argued that the Board was using registration fees to close its budget gap.

At the time, the Board’s AMC application and registration fee was $2,500 for a two-year period, along with a $25,000 surety bond. According to the Board’s proposed order, Fried indicated in his testimony that financial difficulties had prevented AEC from paying the registration fee and that AEC had been unable to obtain a surety bond because of its poor credit rating. Fried also admitted that, at the time of the Board’s hearing in December 2013, AEC still owed money to appraisers in Oregon for their appraisal work. Fried also acknowledged that he was aware of Oregon’s law requiring appraisers to be paid within 60 days after the appraisal is submitted, according to the Board’s proposed order.

The Board acknowledged that AEC and Fried had experienced financial difficulties due to the economic crisis of 2008 and that AEC had trouble getting its appraisal platform operational, but concluded that such facts were without merit and not relevant to the matter of whether AEC had violated Oregon law.

Final Order
While the complaint against AEC was initially filed in 2012, it wasn’t until January 2014 that the Oregon Board issued a Final Order of disciplinary action against Fried. While the Board acknowledged that it had the authority to assess a penalty of up to $15,000 per violation, it elected to assess a lower penalty.

The Oregon Appraiser Board utilizes an AMC Sanction Guidelines Grid that outlines the civil penalties that AMCs face for violations of the state’s AMC regulations. The penalty amounts range from a low of $250-$500 per violation, with the highest penalty being a fine of $15,000 and the revocation of the AMC’s license. To view the Sanction Guidelines Grid in full, click here. The Board also maintains a Sanction Guidelines Grid for appraisers that can be viewed here.

Using the Sanction Guidelines Grid, the Board assessed a penalty of $500 for the first instance of unregistered AMC activity, and a $1,000 fine for every instance thereafter. Although the Board initially alleged 94 violations of AMC regulations, it had evidence for 88 violations only, a fact that was indicated in the Board’s Final Order. As a result, the Board assessed a civil penalty against Fried for a total amount of $87,500.

According to the Board’s Final Order, AEC discontinued operations in September 2012. A statement issued by a Fiscal Analyst at the Board confirmed that neither AEC or Michael Fried had made any payments towards the civil penalties at the time of this writing.

AMC Regulation
Since the Dodd-Frank Act was passed in 2010 and mandated that the states pass laws requiring the licensure and regulation of AMCs, 38 states have enacted legislation governing the oversight and licensing of AMCs, according to the Appraisal Institute. Dodd-Frank gave the states five years to establish AMC rules, but many, like Oregon, chose to move quickly to comply with the Law.

The Oregon Board’s case against AEC and Fried is indicative of a broader move by state appraiser boards to enforce these new AMC regulations. Such a move is likely to have a positive effect for appraisers, as state boards can help ensure that appraisers are paid on time and that AMCs are both properly registered and operating according to state AMC regulations.

Since many state AMC regulations include provisions which require AMCs to pay C&R fees, respect appraiser independence, and treat appraisers professionally, increased enforcement of these rules will no doubt cause AMCs to pay closer attention to compliance, resulting in a better work environment for rank and file appraisers.

> Find Directory of Best AMCs to Work With

Hot: On-Demand Webinar
Fighting Appraisal Board Complaints: Expert’s Advice

Great presentation! I hope that I will never have need or use for the information, but I feel better prepared in the event that I ever do. Thanks!

– Gary Hartmann

Fighting Appraisal Board Complaints: Expert’s Advice
Bob Keith, MAA, IFA, Former Executive Director and Compliance Coordinator for the Oregon Appraisal Board, gives you an expert’s insight into the complaint process, showing you how to avoid the most common mistakes appraisers make when dealing with their state board. Save yourself the pain with this insider help. Learn what steps to take to protect yourself before, during and after a complaint surfaces and what is and isn’t in your own best interests. Keith takes you through a step-by-step process on how to interact with your state board to achieve the best results possible. Put an expert on your side. Read More.

Watch on Demand $39
(FREE to OREP Members/ Affiliates / WRE Subscribers. Email isaac@orep.org for your invitation.)

About the Author
Isaac Peck is the Associate Editor of Working RE magazine and the Director of Marketing at OREP.org, a leading provider of E&O insurance for appraisers, inspectors and other real estate professionals in 49 states. He received his Master’s Degree in Accounting at San Diego State University. He can be contacted at Isaac@orep.org or (888) 347-5273.

>Click to Print
>Subscribe to Working RE Newsletters

Send your story submission/idea to the Editor: dbrauner@orep.org

 

Tags: ,

Comments (12)

  1. Another aspect of being able to perform emergency assistance is due to the time that an ambulance can take to arrive at the scene. Leaders including Miami Dade Mayor Carlos Gimenez gave Perez the royal treatment despite his criminal past and a long trail of litigation against him, including a recent four year prison stint for cocaine trafficking.A major resource for internet marketing will be the search engines. Cheap Jerseys China.Wholesale NFL Jerseys China. Know More about clash of clans hack tool.Wholesale Jerseys China. When catering is carried out properly it really has the ability to make your event superb and really wow your guests. Perez gave plum jobs to former drug trafficker buddies and raised bundles of cash for Danilo Medina, president of the Dominican Republic.Since we mentioned painting, if you need a small repairs job or something of a larger scope done, painting Downtown Boston can be done by professionals that know what they are doing, that know what they are looking to produce in the end. Even if you have wholesome the teeth, it’s vital that you keep an eye on them. A good lease of Back bay handyman services will serve your purposes even if you are not 100 percent sure of what needs to be done, or how the job breaks down into. The expungement allows individuals to gain their state professional license as well as gain employment without prejudice.8 include (a) people that were arrested but have their case dismissed (b) arrested but no criminal charges were filed and (c) acquitted by the California jury trial court.If numerous folders and data files call for the exact same permissions, spot them inside atotally free MCSE PDF queries,implement the permissions in the best in the hierarchy, and propagate them all through the hierarchy.Visit my site:http://www.cheapoutletnfljerseys.us.com/

    - Reply
  2. by Jeremy Hall Appraisals - Colorado

    The problem with amc’s and appraisers is that the amc’s fee is inappropriately co mingled with the appraisers fee. Different services should demand different fees. Everyone from Alamode to every major big box amc has supported this practice of co mingling amc and appraiser fees. The amc’s have a financial incentive to depress appraisers fees for variable opportunistic profit. It’s external pressure at it’s finest, and nothing short of forcing a separation of fees will rejuvenate the appraisal industry. As long as amc’s can put downward fee pressure on appraisal fees for profit, they will continue to do so. It is more profitable for them to disregard the law, and fight any legal battle in the court room or board, than it is for them to be compliant. The solution is to force de bundling of these fees. Amc’s would not put this much pressure on the appraiser fee, just to save some one else a dollar. I could run an amc, if only I was willing to abandon ethics and participate in monopoly systems which constrain free markets. This industry is all hot air, all the time. Expect worsening working conditions for appraisers to continue indefinitely, as long as amc’s can control appraisers fees and are in charge of bundled appraisal fee payouts.

    - Reply
  3. Due to the new Collateral Underwriter rules. I hereby am announcing an increase in my Appraisal fees: Att. AMC Effective immediate Single Family Homes and condos $225 GO F YOURSELF . $650 I will accept. Multi Family $250 GO F YOURSELF $ 800 I will accept. to all Amc please don’t bother me if you dont agree with my prices. Jane the appraise

    - Reply
  4. The undeniable fact that the discovery in the above OREGON article was at 2012, and the purchase that is last the situation was maybe not until 2014 is pathetic.

    Will there be any regulation on fees? This ambiguity customary and reasonable is of who is opinion? I have completed many a questionairre, or poll into the past years that are few regarding reasonable and customary charges, and it seems too me that fees are getting less now than before. I am still being insulted by larger AMC’s that demand work for $200 for local and $250 for work that will away be 50 miles! This doesn’t take place normally myself or the order positioning persons at these AMC’s know not to send me this type of are I have removed. Is $200 – $250 the norm for costs today?
    t is mandatory that all charges to appraisers be paid before any fines are considered. The banking institutions that took on this AMC as a merchant should share within the obligation and required to create yes every Appraiser is paid. The issue at this point they must be having to pay the appraisers interest and penalties like those on the credit cards.

    - Reply
  5. Every appraiser should be clear: Regulatory agencies place a very LOW priority on issues dealing with appraisers. States don’t have the budgets to act, and at the federal level the attention is a joke, a charade and a farce. This is especially so when complaints have to do with appraisers not getting paid C&R levels, and worse, not getting paid at all. Any investigation by ANY state in these matters, especially at this “early” stage of Dodd-Frank (gutted by the FED, effectively) implementation will by force of regulatory protocols, procedures and “budgeting” will be drawn out. When found guilty or not in compliance, the larger AMC’s (typically owned by the lenders, Wall Street corp’s or title co.’s) can be expected to be fined nickels and dimes. Outstanding appraiser balances will be fought tooth and nail, with no assist from the state, for appraisers. The smaller one’s can be expected to go out of business, leaving appraisers sucking wind, holding bags and not getting paid at all. Officers at these AMC’s, regardless of size, will not be penalized or fined or removed from their positions. And when an AMC goes out fo business without paying, anyone think the regulatory agencies will go after individuals and controlling entities? Don’t hold your breath. Sort of makes a mockery of everything, when we consider what the penalties, fines and disciplinary actions are against appraisers, ain’t it? Real nice level field to everything, don’t you think?

    - Reply
  6. It should be mandatory that all fees to appraisers be paid before any fines are considered. The banks that took on this AMC as a vendor should share in the liability and required to make sure every Appraiser has been compensated. At this point they should be paying the appraisers interest and penalties like those on their credit cards the issue.

    - Reply
  7. Hi Kimberly, the names of the lenders were not included in any documentation we have received about this issue, so I couldn’t tell you! We posted the entire Proposed Order and you are welcome to review it, the links are within the story. In regards to your second question, I do not believe the appraisers involved were sanctioned. Thanks for reading Working RE!

    - Reply
  8. The fact that the discovery in the above OREGON article was in 2012, and the final order for the case was not until 2014 is pathetic.

    Is there any regulation on fees? This ambiguity “reasonable and customary” is of who’s opinion? I have filled out many a questionairre, or poll in the past few years, regarding reasonable and customary fees, and it appears too me that fees are getting less now than before. I am still being insulted by larger AMC’s that request work for $200 for local and $250 for work that may be 50 miles away! This doesn’t happen as often as I have removed myself or the order placement persons at these AMC’s know not to send me this kind of work. Is $200 – $250 the norm today for fees?

    - Reply
  9. A $175 (1004) appraisal is not customary and reasonable.
    This was the fee paid in 1974!. Dodd-Frank mandates customary and reasonable
    fees be paid to appraisers. Dodd-Frank is the law! Report these violations to
    local offices of your U.S. Attorney General.

    - Reply
  10. by Kimberly DeFilippis

    Unless I missed it or you purposely failed to omit it, you left out the name(s) of the lenders the unlicensed Oregon AMC represented. Who was the lender? And, were the appraisers who provided services the the unlicensed Oregon AMC also sanctioned?

    - Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *