“Pet Rock” Next!

OK, more seriously- much of what I enjoyed most in getting my masters was studying pricing theory. One of my professors summed up years of study very nicely by saying: “in short, charge as much as you can. In modeling, there’s no way to account for all the variables, but the market will tell you if the price is too high.”

I couldn’t agree more.

By the way:

“a valuation that is too low pretty much scuppers the whole transaction.”

Very nice- as a sailor/boater I’ve got to give you a thumbs up for that. ;-)

What I’m talking about is two things.

First, the lower the compensation for a given field, the more likely it is the most qualified people will look to do something else for a living.

Second, the less compensation for a given task, the less time will be spent doing it.

As to agent not complaining about appraisals being too high, again agents wouldn’t typically know what an appraisal comes in at unless it’s lower than the contract price. And I’ve been complaining about refinance appraisals for years. It makes it very tough to convince a client that their property is worth $XXX,XXX when a year earlier they had an appraisal for $XXX,XXX plus $100,000. No matter what the market since, I have to tell them that their property wasn’t worth that a year ago.

With appraisers earning less money, appraisals are going to become less accurate.

If there is one thing I am convinced of, it is the fact that there is NO direct correlation between price and quality. There are plenty of things that cost more, yet are worse than the inexpensive alternatives. Just look at the money each province in Canada spends per pupil on High School educations. It is glaringly clear that there is NO correlation between test scores and the money spent.

I think it would be egregious to assume that appraisals will be of a lower quality when the price is lower.

Still, I don’t want to defend the new system. Some of the complaints I have heard regarding shoddy paperwork and lengthy waits sound quite legitimate. it is just the griping about low valuations that I have an issue with. You almost NEVER heard realtors or lenders get upset about having valuations that were too high during the bubble years, and to now hear industry professionals complain they are too low smacks of bias.

This makes sense, of course. A valuation that is too high doesn’t prevent a deal from going through (and everyone getting paid), whereas a valuation that is too low pretty much scuppers the whole transaction.

This all reminds me of my past life as a journalist, doing product reviews for computer magazines. There was a lot of subtle pressure to write positive stories. No editor ever asked for me to give thumbs-up recommendations, but it became clear that the people who wrote positive reviews had smoother careers. The sales team at my magazine just LOVED one of my colleagues since tech companies were always begging to run advertisements in conjunction with his articles.

In my case, I had the publisher (i.e. the guy responsible for sales), kindly point out that I had the lowest ratio of “buy” recommendations of any other reviewer. I also frequently found myself in conference calls with irate CEOs and their corporate counsels, threatening lawsuits over my negative stories. I came to know the lawyers for my magazine very well (at least they appreciated me, since I brought them so much business).

By contrast, my friend who never saw a product he didn’t like, was always being fetted at fancy dinners by computer companies. Also, it soon became clear that companies with new products would take them to him first, hoping that he would consent to review them before I managed to get my hands on their offerings. He also never had to sit through hostile meetings with executives and lawyers, who were threatening all manner of legal actions when they could find the time to squeeze in a word that wasn’t profane.

The whole experience opened my eyes as to how much grey there is in this world, and that there are many small and subtle things that can distort markets that don’t meet the definition of fraud or bribery. To this day I would never say that my friend was on “the take”, or that he didn’t believe what he wrote. But it was clear that his over-all disposition was to give the benefit of the doubt to everything he looked at, and he was always “positive” in his discussions and ideas about the future. Myself, by comparison, was always thinking about how many of these products were a waste of money, and that many aspects of technology likely wouldn’t change much in even a decade.

I think of the whole issue with appraisers (and other real-estate financial complex participants) in the same light. I think that only a handful of these insiders were committing “fraud” during the boom, but I do strongly believe that most participants were willing to play along.

This was an MJ free zone. Show some restraint. ;-)

Edit–I like the site censoring. It’s like “This Week in Unnecessary Censorship.” It looks worse than it was.

CNBC is promoting another mark to model reform. http://www.cnbc.com/id/31529887/site/14081545

“By: Diana Olick
CNBC Real Estate Reporter

I want to thank everyone for the emails into the RealtyCheck@cnbc.com regarding the Home Valuation Code of Conduct.

Hundreds of mortgage industry representatives, from small and large shops, sent in stories of botched appraisals, of allegedly negligent appraisal management companies, and of lost deals that are so necessary to recovery in this fragile housing market.

Very very few of you argued the opposing side.”

CNBC also promoted the FASB change in mark to model for “Toxic Assets” So much market manipulation out there. Absent regulation you generally find predation.

Wall Street against main street. Here we go again.

Kary what do you mean by worse – I mean specifically in what way?

That’s the problem here. A lot of you seem to think lower is somehow better. The goal isn’t higher or lower. The goal is more accurate. A house shouldn’t appraise over 5% too high or 5% too low, and preferably it would be better than that.

With appraisers earning less money, appraisals are going to become less accurate. That’s why I say this isn’t going to fix the problem. You’ll still have too high of appraisals, it will just be for a different reason (low compensation instead of originator pressure).

BTW, an interesting side-effect of this is that if you have two offers, one FHA and one conventional, the seller is going to be more inclined to go with the FHA, if for no other reason, the appraisal is more likely to be done on time.

What we’re discussing is problems with the system, and a solution that was less than ideal. Reducing the compensation paid to appraisers is not going to somehow magically make things better. It will only make things worse, and that should be fairly obvious.

Appraisers were just just one small aspect of the whirlwind, but they too had moral decisions to make, and the fact that everyone else was letting things pass, and refusing to stand up for principals, doesn’t absolve them (or anyone else).

I’m not sure people fully understand what the problem was. Mortgage originators can do a lot of business, meaning one client of an appraiser might be responsible for over 50% of their business. The pressure such a client can put on an appraiser, or anyone in that type of situation, is incredible.

How many people here would make a decision to not cave to the pressure if the alternative would be your own foreclosure and bankruptcy?

It’s for that reason I think one of the reforms should have been that an appraiser cannot do more than 10% or $XX,XXX.xx of work for one firm. That would go a long way to eliminating those types of pressures.

RE: Greg Perry @ 68 – So we have the word of the NAR and some unverifiable stories from yourself and Kary, all of whom are part of the “business, free enterprise” of selling homes, saying that there is a problem with appraisals (other than they are accurate, even when lower than what you would like). Are you seeing the problem here?

What evidence do I have that there is any real problem with appraisals, except that they are accurate, even when it is inconvenient for the salespeople?

You are so correct. It’s all a huge conspiracy. NAR, Kary and I are trying to pull the wool over your eyes, but you won’t let us. Ohhhh no, not you! That NAR is the axis of evil, however, nothing compared to the villainy of Kary and Greg! (Despicable characters that they are)

Bwah ha ha ha ha!

Here’s a hint…..BIG hint. Just google” HVCC” and read only the first 10 pages. If you don’t find what you want, let me know so I can stay up at night to compose more unverifiable stories to “convince” you.

Bwah ha ha ha ha!

What evidence do I have that there is any real problem with appraisals, except that they are accurate, even when it is inconvenient for the salespeople?

The environment that all professionals worked in the industry, from top to bottom was somewhat shaped by monetary policy and lending standards. There were a few years that the banks were pumping the money as fast and as loose as they could. Personally I would no way infer good professionals doing their jobs as taught and as instructed by banks and the policy of the time to be people of little integrity. The fact is, more appraisers cared more about value than the banks that received their appraisal.

I agree that appraisers shouldn’t be singled out as the only culprits in the financial bubble, there is blame to go round. This is why I also believe that it was impossible for a person of integrity to have worked at the ratings agencies, lenders, or investment banks in the last decade. The few people who refused to keep piling on the risk lost their jobs, and I applaud them. I just don’t buy the excuse from those who say you had to play along. So what if all the other lenders were offering better deals than you were? If that means you bank has to cease mortgage lending then so be it.

Appraisers were just just one small aspect of the whirlwind, but they too had moral decisions to make, and the fact that everyone else was letting things pass, and refusing to stand up for principals, doesn’t absolve them (or anyone else).

Why should you take anything at face value?

RE: anony @ 59 –
NAR is a real estate agent association. It has some products to promote and they are mostly housing, home ownership, and working with a Realtor.. What’s wrong with that? It’s business. Free enterprise. You are a discriminating, educated consumer that can figure things out for your best outcome.

That is basically like saying “No, you can’t trust them for reliable info, they are just trying to promote (sell) their products”

What’s wrong with that, maybe nothing. But it does mean we can’t take their complaints about appraisals at face value.

Your assumption is incorrect. Builders (and every day resale sellers in certain situations) pay many many marketing costs that are in no way associated with an agent’s commission.

Advertising, staging, and showing a home are marketing costs. Paying bribes out of the proceeds of the sale are not. Marketing costs are borne by the agent, who hopes to recoup the expense through the commission paid. Cars, vacations, cash, etc. are paid by the seller, only after the sale is completed. And it is usually an inflated sales price that funds that.

Do any of these “expenses” show up on any of the documents that the bank sees prior to making the loan? Does escrow record that $10,000 payment from seller to buyer? I imagine most of this stuff occurs with a wink-and-a-nod. Ultimately, these costs are borne by whoever makes the loan.

The only way you will convince me that these are not bribes is if all of these “marketing costs” are paid out of the agents commission.

Some people like Toyota, some like Ford. Nobody seems to like Chrysler these days……

BTW, I haven’t noticed NAR promoting high prices either in public or private. Can you share an example?

“They are BRIBES!”
Correct. So is the new toaster for opening an checking account. Free lifetime oil changes. Buy one and get one free. All advertising and marketing, along with every other costs affects the builder’s profitability.

I’m not arguing for or against. I’m saying it’s not the appraisers job to figure this out. It’s a policy issue.

I would think it’s fairer to say the NAR wants volume.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t have passions for your position. You have some good points that I agree with. I think much of your angst is pointed at the wrong entity. It was the banks and the government were creating policy and loaning the money. The environment that all professionals worked in the industry, from top to bottom was somewhat shaped by monetary policy and lending standards. There were a few years that the banks were pumping the money as fast and as loose as they could.

The appraiser has no practical way to know closing costs and other concessions, and the fact is, the banks really didn’t care. UNDERWRITERS would bypass or adjust appraisals. Personally I would no way infer good professionals doing their jobs as taught and as instructed by banks and the policy of the time to be people of little integrity. The fact is, more appraisers cared more about value than the banks that received their appraisal.
Those blatantly breaking the rules, or doing something illegal, then yes, but many many appraisers did not break any rules!

No question, there were, and still are housing fraud rings which need to be brought down.

Perhaps the big issue here is the shot credibility of the NAR and agents in general. It is a pretty open secret that the NAR has fights very hard to keep home prices as high as possible, and their press releases, commercials, lobbying, ect. are largely attempts to get people to buy homes, rather than attempts to be an advocate for the consumer. A lot of “buyers” agents are the same way. Can you really be surprised that when the NAR comes out now against the appraisal rules, due to low appraisals the NAR claims are faulty, that people don’t believe them? I mean if they were full of it and just trying to sell overpriced homes it would fit a well known pattern of behavior, wouldn’t it?

Maybe the NAR is telling the truth in this case (because it happens to serve their needs at the moment). I don’t know, but I sure don’t believe anything just because the NAR and a bunch of agents on blogs say so.

I don’t deal at all in new construction, but I think most of those pertained to the property itself–improvements. And as I mentioned, seller financed closing costs can be determined by an appraiser if they ask.

The seller paying the buyer, after closing, a vacation, a car, house upgrades, cash, or other items of value are not marketing costs. They are BRIBES! They should correctly be subtracted from the sale price for purposes of calculating the loan and determining comps.

I wonder if the bank making the loan knows about that $10,000 “marketing” cost?

if the buyer and seller enter into an �arm�s length� transaction, and comps are available to support the price, how could an appraiser NOT find value?

A huge number of the comps themselves were false, since the sale prices often included kick-backs and so on. Appraisers (and everyone else) knew this was happening, so they were fully cognizant that the normal valuation techniques were inadequate. Further, comps where the buyers had very little money down, or were obtaining option-ARM or interest only loans, were clearly distorting the prices. .

Appraisers can and do call and ask about seller concessions on transactions.

The idea that an appraiser should adjust their value because they don’t like certain types of financing is a bit absurd. Their job is to value the property in the current market, and as long as that financing is still available at the time of the appraisal, that is the current market. That gets to my point about the 3/08 refinance appraisal where they were using comps from a period where financing was slightly different. That was improper at that time, but not say in 8/07.

Homeowners dues are a perfectly fine thing to negotiate, and will be found within the actual purchase and sale, as are the closing costs noted on the purchase and sale. The same with builder upgrades.

These kick-backs may well be legal. I am merely saying that there is NO way an appraisal should ever be equal to or greater than the agreed sale price if kick-backs are included as a part of that price. Any appraisal that does meet the sale price when kick-backs are involved is fraudulent. It might well be that the appraiser herself doesn’t know about the kick-backs, in which case the fraud lies with other parties who don’t disclose the terms to the appraiser.

Further, when most of the comps are for a deal that included kick-backs as a part of the sale price (legal or otherwise) then those comps are going to give a completely innacurate idea of the true valuation.

This brings me back to my earlier contention. Appraisers KNEW that kick-backs were rampant as a part of sales, and thus were in a position to know that the comps they relied on were most likely bogus. It’s all well and good to say that things were out of the appraiser’s hands, but when you know that the information you rely on is a lie, but use it anyway, you have proven yourself to be a person of little integrity.

Like I said, I don’t think it was possible to have been gainfully employed as an appraiser between 2004 and mid-2007 without being knowingly complicity in creating false valuations (to greater and lesser degrees). Anyone with integrity would have just left the industry.

if the buyer and seller enter into an �arm�s length� transaction, and comps are available to support the price, how could an appraiser NOT find value?

A huge number of the comps themselves were false, since the sale prices often included kick-backs and so on. Appraisers (and everyone else) knew this was happening, so they were fully cognizant that the normal valuation techniques were inadequate. Further, comps where the buyers had very little money down, or were obtaining option-ARM or interest only loans, were clearly distorting the prices. Just as we suggest appraisers don’t use short or REO sales as comps today, no sale that was financed with no money down, or utilized option ARMs or interest only loans should have been included in the evaluation process.

I don’t believe that the use of kick-backs or exotic financing (by which I mean no money down, option ARM, or interest only loans) were rare at all from the beginning of 2004 to the end of 2007. I know of many friends who received “free” upgrades, freebies (vacations, TVs, etc), or cash payments when they bought a home. One friend even got 6 months of home owner association fees paid.

I can’t see how ANY appraiser can, in good conscience, sign off on a home being worth the value of the sale price if the buyer is getting some sort of remuneration.

I can see somewhat where you are coming from.

As for the incentives (like vacations, cars, etc), especially for builders, these more more marketing costs, and not considered a cost of the home. They are perfectly fine and often laid out within the text of the listing on the MLS. The public doesn’t always see the incentives as they are published in the agent only comments. Sometimes these incentives are advertised in newspapers, signs and billboards. Many incentives are really marketing costs, and not associated with the house price.

Homeowners dues are a perfectly fine thing to negotiate, and will be found within the actual purchase and sale, as are the closing costs noted on the purchase and sale. The same with builder upgrades. They are a contract item. Any material item that involves value must be included in the purchase and sale agreement. If these agreement happen outside of escrow, it is considered fraud.

Could the appraiser see incentives and closing costs on the comps? Not always. And, they don’t see them now, nor did they see them 20 years ago. I’m not arguing for or against here. However, the conditions have always remained relative.

As for the exotic loan, no downs, sub prime, et al, These really were not the appraiser’s issue. These are a bank issues and policy issues, and of course we are paying the piper, for sure. I don’t think we should confuse appraisers and what they do with the the policy issues coming from the banks. Sometimes, if an appraiser is really stumped they will call past listing agents to inquire about closing costs, etc., The appraiser has no practical way to find this information.

Also, is a short sale an arm’s length transaction? No. The seller is distressed and has undue pressure, and the buyer faces increased RISK. IMO, this should NOT be factored into an appraisal with a buyer and seller IN an arm’s length transaction. The reason short sales are below market is BECAUSE it is a distressed property because of the increased risk to the buyer.

Again, remember the appraisers job is to VERIFY value. With an arm’s length transaction in an appreciating market — not hard to do. In a depreciating market, more difficult.

if the buyer and seller enter into an “arm’s length” transaction, and comps are available to support the price, how could an appraiser NOT find value?

A huge number of the comps themselves were false, since the sale prices often included kick-backs and so on. Appraisers (and everyone else) knew this was happening, so they were fully cognizant that the normal valuation techniques were inadequate. Further, comps where the buyers had very little money down, or were obtaining option-ARM or interest only loans, were clearly distorting the prices. Just as we suggest appraisers don’t use short or REO sales as comps today, no sale that was financed with no money down, or utilized option ARMs or interest only loans should have been included in the evaluation process.

I don’t believe that the use of kick-backs or exotic financing (by which I mean no money down, option ARM, or interest only loans) were rare at all from the beginning of 2004 to the end of 2007. I know of many friends who received “free” upgrades, freebies (vacations, TVs, etc), or cash payments when they bought a home. One friend even got 6 months of home owner association fees paid.

I can’t see how ANY appraiser can, in good conscience, sign off on a home being worth the value of the sale price if the buyer is getting some sort of remuneration.

Fraud problems were in the minority of purchase transactions. The true measure of market value is the agreed to price in an “arm’s length” transaction between the buyer and the seller. In the hot areas during the run up, a huge proportion of transactions were multiple offer transactions, where we saw multiple buyers agreeing to value.

I’m assuming that when you say an appraiser would have never have written an appraisal that was equal to or greater than the agreed sales price at the height of the boom you mean the “peak” of the market? Even then, if the buyer and seller enter into an “arm’s length” transaction, and comps are available to support the price, how could an appraiser NOT find value?

And how can an appraiser see the peak anyway? You have to remember, that by and large they drive in their rear view mirror. And remember, prior to the peak, MOM appreciaition was exceeding 10%.

The appraisers job is not to create a value. Value creation (market value) is a the function of the market (buyer and seller coming to terms in an arm’s length transaction). Most appraisers have a hard time establishing a market price (working agents are much better at establishing market price). The appraiser’s job in the transaction is to verify value. Why, for heaven’s sake would an appraiser walk away from the business of verifying value in an arm’s length transaction with supporting comps? I would submit that any appraiser that would intentionally lower value with rising appreciation, an arm’s length transaction and comps would be the appraiser that would be derelict.

Yes, the fraud rings were bad and crooked (or lacked integrity) appraisers, along with crooked mortgage initiators, escrow companies and agents cooked some poor people. That doesn’t make all appraisers, loan officers, escrow companies and agents crooked (or lack integrity).

In rising markets we rarely see an appraisal come in over the agreed to price. We normally see them come in “at value”. I’ve actually seen more appraisals come in higher in declining markets (just had a VA appraisal come in $30+K over the agreed to price.).

(by the way seller’s are paying almost all of the today’s buyer’s closing costs — appraisers still don’t see this. It’s been that way for decades)

This, however, assumes that it was in fact a relatively small percentage of appraisers that gave into lender pressure.

It is my belief tha the vast majority of appraisers were using overly optimistic assumptions at the height of the boom, even if they weren’t acting as mouth-pieces for the lender. The simple fact is that if your valuations were consistently lower than the agreed sales prices you simply couldn’t have remained gainfully employeed as an appraiser during the boom.

Further, I would argue that any appraiser who was truly only interested in giving accurate valuations would never have written an appraisal that was equal to or greater than the agreed sale price at the height of the boom. There were so many obvious games being played that drove up “official” prices (e.g. cash-back payments to buyers, etc), that you just couldn’t trust that the comps were accurate. Thus, it is my contention that anyone who was gainfully employed as an appraiser during the boom was actively complicit in the deceptions taking place.

Any appraiser with integrity would have walked away from the business.

I forgot to mention a very important detail on my buyer. This is a 75% LTV transaction with the buyers sporting 800+ credit!

A more stringent review process would police the fraud issues, which afterall is the core issue.

That’s sort of what I’m saying. A bad appraisal typically would be somewhat obvious on its face.

It would probably help if the underwriter had access to the MLS system for the area. But review is probably the key. It would typically take less than an hour time.

By Sniglet @ 42:

I would much rather side with the appraiser (in cases where the valuation was less than the sale price) rather than automatically assume that they somehow messed things up.

Exactly. That’s what I’m taking issue with too. The attitude we’re seeing reflected in the types of news reports I quoted in the post is “if the appraisal comes in lower than the purchase price, it’s obviously flawed, if it comes in at or above the purchase price, it’s a success.”

The problem is this mindset that seems to permeate among real estate agents and mortgage originators that the appraisal process is a mere formality that gets in the way of “getting the deal done (no matter what).”

Yet at this time we’re seeing very bad appraisers coming in from out of county. The good appraisers are leaving the business. When they don’t get bedroom, bathroom and fireplace counts wrong — an’t figure square feet, there’s something very wrong. This is not an exaggeration. I’m hearing it all over.

Hi,
I had a home a month ago that closed for $317K with an appraisal that came in at $350k. It was a VA appraisal to boot….go figure.

At any rate, I haven’t experienced a low appraisal problem, yet.

I more offended by the inequities and inefficiencies in the new system. The problem is not that difficult. A more stringent review process would police the fraud issues, which afterall is the core issue.

I would much rather side with the appraiser (in cases where the valuation was less than the sale price) rather than automatically assume that they somehow messed things up.

Exactly. That’s what I’m taking issue with too. The attitude we’re seeing reflected in the types of news reports I quoted in the post is “if the appraisal comes in lower than the purchase price, it’s obviously flawed, if it comes in at or above the purchase price, it’s a success.”

The problem is this mindset that seems to permeate among real estate agents and mortgage originators that the appraisal process is a mere formality that gets in the way of “getting the deal done (no matter what).”

While there may be a few situations where the home really is worth more than what the appraiser determined, I think this is extremely rare.

I would much rather side with the appraiser (in cases where the valuation was less than the sale price) rather than automatically assume that they somehow messed things up.

As to the first point copied, you have absolutely no basis to make that determination. No agent or broker could make that determination either. All they would know is what happens on their transactions. You don’t even know that! You have a sample size of zero.

As to the second point, I’d agree you shouldn’t automatically assume anything as to whether it’s high or low. But I am willing to assume that when appraisers are picked randomly and paid less, that the results will be less accurate. This, however, assumes that it was in fact a relatively small percentage of appraisers that gave into lender pressure.

The AMC’s are charging up to 50% more for appraisals and giving the appraisers 30-50% less. Crummy appraisers now have work, and the good appraisers are receiving much less business AND receiving less for their appraisals.

This may very well be the case. I certainly do NOT want to defend the new appraisal system, and problems with lengthy delays or improperly written documents are valid criticisms. What I do take issue with is complaints about appraisals coming in below the agreed sale price. I have very little sympathy for this kind of problem. While there may be a few situations where the home really is worth more than what the appraiser determined, I think this is extremely rare.

I would much rather side with the appraiser (in cases where the valuation was less than the sale price) rather than automatically assume that they somehow messed things up.

I am in a transaction right now where the appraisal was ordered on June 4. Nothing was happening and I started to aggressively follow up with the originator, who followed up with the bank (a large bank), who was at the mercy of the assigned AMC. It was finally completed in-field on June 18th (14 days from order to execution). Then the AMC had issue with the appraiser’s work, sent it back to be corrected and we finally received the completed appraisal yesterday, at value. (This appraisal was done by an out of county appraiser)

The transaction is supposed to close today and now today is the first day lender docs can be ordered.

The Buyers are frantic. They have nowhere to live and are forced to incur storage costs. All the help they had lined up for their move is now gone. Thankfully they can camp out with friends and don’t have to foot the bill for a motel. If the deal doesn’t get done in 5 days however, they lose their rate lock.

The Seller, who is very thin in proceeds, runs up interest, taxes and utility expenses now by the day.

Everything could be solved for the satisfaction of the everybody, at a fraction of the costs and hassle, if a simple checks and review procedures were implemented.

Appraisal fraud is a huge issue, but the concept of the AMC’s are like taking a blow torch to a match fight. Incompetency in the system is hurting the consumer by:
1. Losing rate locks
2. Buying more than one appraisal. (if the buyer must change lenders, transfers are almost impossible)
3. Increase in the costs for appraisals done by incompetent appraisers.
4. Extenuating expenses caused by properties not closing on time.
and many, many other misc. expenses.

The only benefactors are the AMC’s, and the group of appraisers that were so bad that they weren’t getting business. The consumer is getting a screwing.

I know of two excellent appraisers that have high integrity who are leaving appraising and interviewing now for jobs. What the industry is left with is the dregs of the lowest common denominator.

Put your self into a buyer’s shoes (or sellers) who is paying extra, needless and unanticipated expenses and the good appraisers with integrity who can’t make a living.

McDermotts property looks like it is valued fairly closely to the neighboring properties.

Here’s my observation about the appraisal issue. When (most) real estate agents today complain about “inaccurate appraisals” or “faulty valuations,” that is code for “the appraisal was too low.” You never heard complaints from real estate agents about “faulty valuations” during the boom, although I am certain there were plenty.

Agents don’t typically see the appraisal or even know what it came in at when the appraisal is at or above the sale.price.

Stocks Fall as Savings Rate Jumps- AP
Investors are nervous because consumers are saving rather than spending. Stocks fell Friday after the Commerce Department reported that personal spending, incomes and savings all rose in May.

I’d add that personal income is household income and with families shacking together more and more with this recession/depression, just what does the term household/personal income as a YOY comparison mean anymore?

yes but its under assessed by 50%+?

Thats worth a listen.