» OREP/WRE – 2017 Fee Survey Results

6

2017 Fee Survey Results

Please click on your state to download the Customary and Reasonable survey results. If the PDF for your state doesn’t open, please make sure you have the latest version of Adobe Reader.

This survey is sponsored by OREP – Helping Appraisers for over 15 years.

Alabama

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

Delaware

Florida

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

Iowa

Kansas

Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts

Michigan

Minnesota

Mississippi

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

New Hampshire

New Jersey

New Mexico

New York

North Carolina

North Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Rhode Island

South Carolina

South Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

Washington

Washington DC

West Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Tags: , ,

Comments (6)

  1. In rural Northwestern Montana, specifically the Flathead & Tobacco Valleys & Sanders County, we do not even get reported. We have some of the most difficult properties to appraise here….off the grid properties, properties with springs or lakes as the water source, manufactured houses with frame additions, etc. An appraiser never knows what she or he will find when they make an appointment. The public records are not always correct since only in the cities are people building required to have building permits. Rural Montana had the most responses at 22. Billings which is a MSA only had 2 appraisers respond. That’s disappointing. I agree with the comment John Simpkins made about Field Reviews. I was a field appraiser and am now a review appraiser for a lending institution. I did a field review of an appraiser who has since surrendered his license. It was not a pretty picture.

    - Reply
  2. fees lower in suburban markets due to low-ball and underskilled/hungry/scared appraisers too afriad to ask for what they are worth and who should really be coached to do math and band together to not offer less than reasonable/customary which should NEVER for any product be under $400. including 2055. And for $400 it better be cookie cutter with model matches next door to the office and 100 sales in prior 60 days of the same floor plan.

    - Reply
  3. by John Simpkins

    I can’t figure out why anyone would have a lower fee for a field review than for an appraisal, given the possibility that the scope will include a full review of someone else’s appraisal AND a complete appraisal. A low fee seems like a very strong incentive to agree with the appraisal under review so as to avoid Part B of the report. Maybe I’m missing something…if so, can someone please enlighten me? Thanks!

    - Reply
  4. In L.A., CA about 92 to 160 of the 218 respondents lack either the skill or the confidence to charge what should be a MINIMUM fee of $450 for a non complex FNMA 1004 Only five of us setting minimums at over 750? I know three others beside myself charging 750; but know of NO ONE charging only $400 or less so I suspect the survey is skewed. I was critical of capping the ranges at $751+ but I guess OREP knows its target audience better than I do. Exceptionally disappointing that fees in one of th emore complex markets in the country are much lower than they are for Oregon or Washington.

    - Reply

Leave a Reply to John Simpkins Cancel reply

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