Appraiser sentenced to 11 years in prison for $5M Ponzi scheme
Excerpt:
A New Jersey real estate appraiser was sentenced to more than 11 years in prison Wednesday for masterminding a $5 million Ponzi scheme that snared a former member of Seton Hall's celebrated 1989 basketball team.Abbe Edelman, 51, of Livingston, pleaded guilty to a wire fraud charge in December, admitting he duped investors into deals to buy up foreclosed properties that didn't exist.On Wednesday, U.S.
District Court Judge Susan Wigenton sentenced Edelman to 11 years and three months in prison, nearly five more than the prison term New Jersey federal prosecutors were seeking.
"You lied about anything and everything," Wigenton told Edelman, who appeared in court in a yellow prison jumpsuit. "I don't know if it's a sickness. I don't know if you're a sociopath."
Very interesting Worth reading.
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2015/04/livingston_man_sentenced_in_5m_investor_scam.html
--------------------------------------------
It's Not a Comp, It's a Sale
Original title: Lies, Damn Lies...and FNMA 'statistics'
Another "good one" by Dave Towne, Washington appraiser and commentator
Reprinted in full with permission
Something's been gnawing at my craw ever since January when FNMA's wonderful CU was unleased to the world. And before that, which still continues, is the AQM process they still use to judge the work of appraisers.
No one else has written about this, or even mentioned it, so I will: It has to do with the word "Comp" which is used liberally by FNMA.
What exactly is a "Comp?"
In FNMA's world, it's any property that they obtain, either by their vast AVM process which examines millions of property transactions, or properties that have been extracted from appraisal reports submitted by appraisers........yes, your work. In their fuzzy logic, it's a "Comp" considered for your report if they say it is. It is not!
A true "Comp" is a property viewed and/or analyzed by a real living, breathing, mirror fogging appraiser who compares that sold property against the subject property in terms of multiple features, characteristics and amenities. It is not determined by an AVM or algorithm within the vast bowels of FNMA. Until the property has such analysis done by an appraiser, it is merely a SALE......it is not a "Comp."
This FNMA lie really became evident to me on 4/20/15 when FNMA released a news release about how CU has been integrated into their on-line Desktop Underwriter software mortgage lenders use, which you can read here: http://www.fanniemae.com/portal/about-us/media/corporate-news/2015/6239.html?p=Media&s=News+Releases&from=RSS
Within that news release is this quotation from a VP at a mortgage lender: "The collateral information that CU provides is invaluable and simply staggering," said Breck Tyler, Executive Vice President, Trustmark Mortgage Services. "CU has aided in providing important comparable data that was previously unavailable or very difficult to get. CU messages in DU will help streamline appraisal review and make the underwriting of an appraisal a much more informed process."
Then, FNMA released info directed to Correspondent Lenders who intend to use the CU process in UCDP, but don't intend to sell the loan to FNMA: https://www.fanniemae.com/content/fact_sheet/collateral-underwriter-non-seller-implementation-guide.pdf
That has this statement: "Fannie Mae does not instruct or suggest to lenders that they ask appraisers to address all or any of the up to 20 comparables that are provided by CU for most appraisals."
I want to repeat what I said above...in case you missed the point: A PROPERTY IS NOT A "COMP" UNLESS YOU DETERMINE IT IS AND INCLUDE IT IN AN APPRAISAL REPORT. Otherwise it's just a 'sale.'
If you're an appraiser who liberally uses the word "Comp" in place of a 'property sale' I would ask that you be more careful. If you receive info from a lender, AMC or anyone else who asks you to look at the "Comp" they have provided, correct them and use the words "sale property" until you have determined that it truly is a "Comp."
I'm also asking members of appraisal organizations and associations to communicate your concern about this lie perpetrated by FNMA directly with them, and ask FNMA to change the word "Comp" used in their CU Reports, news releases, instructional materials, etc. to 'Property Sales' so that there is no misunderstanding about the significance of this issue.
If organizations and associations won't do that on behalf of appraisers, then we might as well kiss the profession of residential real property appraising goodbye. Because if a list of 'sales' are considered "Comps" then an actual human appraiser won't be needed to provide supportable property analysis and market value reports.
WHAT DO YOU THINK? POST YOUR COMMENTS AND READ OTHER COMMENTS AT WWW.APPRAISALTODAYBLOG.COM
My comment: I have been aware of the difference between a sale and a "comp" for a very long time. I try not to mix them up. It is very important when communicating with lenders and real estate agents, who should already know the difference. I am glad that Dave Towne points out this very big difference.
I have not found it to be an issue with non-lender clients, where I use "comparable sales" which is a much clearer term to use, since few are familiar with the term "comp".
-----------------------------------------
Mortgage applications decreased 2.3 percent from one week earlier
According to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association's (MBA) Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey for the week ending April 24, 2015. WASHINGTON, D.C. (April 29, 2015)
The Market Composite Index, a measure of mortgage loan application volume, decreased 2.3 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis from one week earlier. On an unadjusted basis, the Index decreased 2 percent compared with the previous week. The Refinance Index decreased 4 percent from the previous week. The seasonally adjusted Purchase Index was unchanged from one week earlier. The unadjusted Purchase Index increased 1 percent compared with the previous week and was 21 percent higher than the same week one year ago.
The refinance share of mortgage activity decreased to 55 percent of total applications, its lowest level since September 2014, from 56 percent the previous week. The adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) share of activity increased to 5.7 percent of total applications. The average loan size for purchase applications rose to a survey high of $297,000.
The FHA share of total applications increased to 13.7 percent from 13.6 percent the week prior. The VA share of total applications increased to 11.3 percent from 11.0 percent the week prior. The USDA share of total applications remained unchanged at 0.8 percent from the week prior.
The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with conforming loan balances ($417,000 or less) increased to 3.85 percent from 3.83 percent, with points increasing to 0.35 from 0.32 (including the origination fee) for 80 percent loan-to-value ratio (LTV) loans. The effective rate increased from last week.
The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages with jumbo loan balances (greater than $417,000) decreased to 3.82 percent from 3.83 percent, with points increasing to 0.31 from 0.22 (including the origination fee) for 80 percent LTV loans. The effective rate increased from last week.
The average contract interest rate for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages backed by the FHA increased to 3.66 percent from 3.65 percent, with points increasing to 0.16 from 0.12 (including the origination fee) for 80 percent LTV loans. The effective rate increased from last week.
The average contract interest rate for 15-year fixed-rate mortgages increased to 3.14 percent from 3.11 percent, with points increasing to 0.31 from 0.24 (including the origination fee) for 80 percent LTV loans. The effective rate increased from last week.
The average contract interest rate for 5/1 ARMs decreased to 2.88 percent from 2.89 percent, with points decreasing to 0.27 from 0.29 (including the origination fee) for 80 percent LTV loans. The effective rate decreased from last week.
If you would like to purchase a subscription of MBA's Weekly Applications Survey, please visit www.mba.org/WeeklyApps, contact mbaresearch@mba.org or click here.
The survey covers over 75 percent of all U.S. retail residential mortgage applications, and has been conducted weekly since 1990. Respondents include mortgage bankers, commercial banks and thrifts. Base period and value for all indexes is March 16, 1990=100.
|