Flooded With Change: Appraisers Tackle a Dynamic URAR and UAD 3.6 by Isaac Peck, Publisher
Case Dismissed: Ohio Appraiser Wins Discrimination Lawsuit by Isaac Peck, Publisher
Unlocking Success With an Appraiser Franchise? Interview With Chad Barker by Isaac Peck, Publisher
Beyond Terminology: What Fannie Mae’s SellingGuide Updates Mean for Appraisers by Scott DiBiasio, Director of Government Affairs, Appraisal Institute
An AMC as a Partner to Appraisers and Lenders? Interview With Jessie Ruckel by Isaac Peck, Publisher
Highest and Best—and the Highest Value by Richard Hagar, SRA
Journey of a New Appraiser: How Katya Borisova Found Her Niche by Isaac Peck, Publisher
36
USPAP and the State Board by Timothy Andersen, The Appraiser’s Advocate
Appraiser Vindicated: Lanham Discrimination Lawsuit Dismissed in Maryland by Isaac Peck, Publisher
Working RE is published to help readers build their businesses, reduce their risk of liability and stay informed on important technology and industry issues.
Subscribe to Print and Receive Premium Content WorkingRE.com/Subscribe/ Subscription included with OREP Membership (Visit OREP.org).
Comments & letters are welcome! All stories without attribution are written by the editor.
Publisher Isaac Peck isaac@orep.org
Marketing and Design Manager Ariane Herwig ariane@orep.org
Editor Kendra Budd kendra@orep.org
Working
Working RE 6353 El Cajon Blvd., Suite 124-605 San Diego, CA 92115 (888) 347-5273 Fax: (619) 704-0567 subscription@workingre.com www.WorkingRE.com
From the Editor
Reflecting on the Past Year and Looking Ahead
by Kendra Budd, Editor
As the year comes to a close, it’s essential to reflect on all that has impacted the appraisal profession. From new appraisal standards to high-profile court cases against appraisers, 2025 has been anything but stagnant. This issue of Working RE magazine, which you now hold in your hands, details some of the year’s most significant changes and stories.
Perhaps the biggest change introduced this year was the UAD 3.6 system, and the updated Uniform Residential Appraisal Report (URAR)— shifting how residential appraisals will be completed in 2026. The goal is to provide a streamlined approach to appraisal reporting, improve consistency, and advance transparency for the appraisal profession.
Lenders and AMCs have until November 2, 2026, to fully adopt UAD 3.6. However, you can begin familiarizing yourself with these chan-
ges through Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who have already begun rolling out the redesign. Read more about UAD 3.6 and the new URAR redesign on page 6.
This year also brings closure to a story that has been circulating since 2022. On July 17th, the case of Connolly & Mott v. Shane Lanham was dismissed, a lawsuit that claimed appraiser Shane Lanham discriminated against the homeowners. This lawsuit was highly publicized in the media and has been one of the more significant appraisal discrimination lawsuits to have been decided. This case could very well set a precedent for future appraisal discrimination lawsuits and may have many appraisers breathing a sigh of relief. To read more on the case, go to page 38.
However, Connolly & Mott v. Shane Lanham wasn’t the only discrimination lawsuit to get dismissed this year. The
other being Daviola-Turner v. Henley Appraisals LLC et al. Henley, the appraiser sued, had previously requested a motion to dismiss the case and came out on top with the judge granting it. What made this case stand out from the others was that not only did the Turners allege discrimination based off of race, but nationality as well—specifically that Daviola-Turner is originally from Canada. To read all about the case and its dismissal, go to page 12.
2026 will require appraisers to adapt to new tech and systems. For those working in the appraisal sphere, Working RE magazine will be with appraisers every step of the way. Not only are we here to deliver breaking news in the appraisal profession, but to offer actionable advice as well to help you manage your risk and stay out of trouble.
Stay safe out there! WRE
Readers Respond
The Competence to Perform an Assignment
Tim, there is a seemingly innocuous term in paragraph four, “all verified.” It has been my experience that the majority of loan appraisers either were not taught this important step, or simply choose to omit it. Under soft market conditions, it is often the transactional aspect of the sales that drive the prices. Appraisers who do not know the concessions, packed into the sales prices, will come out higher. Some appraisers use auto adjustments, never chang ing them for soft, declining or strong market conditions. Strong or weak location or property factors. I think the GSEs have figured this out, and it may be the underlying motivation to eliminate appraisers as much as possible. Steve R. Smith
Could a Class Action Lawsuit Finally Unbundle Hidden AMC Fees?
Appraisal management companies (AMCs) have bilked the American borrower out of 12 billion dollars. The Appraisal Regulation Compliance Council (ARCC) compiled extensive data that reveals how unregulated appraisal management companies engage in unfair pricing practices, inflating consumer appraisal costs by nearly $15 billion between 2013 and 2023. This research clearly demonstrates the anti-competitive nature of the AMC pricing model of hidden fees and its impact on borrowers’ buying power.
Robert Mossuto Jr.
This comment right here is the biggest issue: “In an email put out by Chad Sta-
nius, SVP of Staff Appraisers at Class, Stanius boasts that ‘by the end of 2023, our remarkable group of staff appraisers completed over 60,000 appraisals for Class Valuation.’ AMCs are not appraisal firms and, by law, should not be allowed to have staff appraisers who complete appraisals. This oversteps their entire purpose of creation. Class-less Valuation is the largest violator of this whole situation appraisers are now in. Clear Capital is a close second. With Class buying up a large market share of smaller AMCs, this stench reeks of anti-trust! PNW Appraiser
Appraisal Fee Transparency Act of 2019: Pivotal Point for Appraisers
Everything REEVA says is BS. They are the culprit. Gene WRE
“The scope of these changes is so broad that both GSEs partnered with leading education providers on a seven-hour continuing education course.”
Flooded With Change: Appraisers Tackle a Dynamic URAR and UAD 3.6
by Isaac Peck, Publisher
UAD 3.6 and the redesigned Uniform Residential Appraisal Report (URAR) have officially arrived, marking a major shift in how residential appraisals are completed and delivered. Replacing the legacy forms with a single dynamic report, the new URAR adapts to each property type and assignment, while UAD 3.6 introduces a more structured, data-driven format.
Together, they aim to streamline reporting, improve consistency, and lay the groundwork for greater transparency across the mortgage industry. Appraisers, lenders, and software providers are now navigating the rollout, preparing for full adoption by late 2026.
For the appraisal profession, this is one of the most significant shifts in decades. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have begun rolling out the redesign after nearly a decade of development. Its Limited Production Period started on September 8, 2025, allowing appraisers to use either the older UAD 2.6 or the new UAD 3.6 format. This dual system window gives everyone a chance to familiarize themselves with the changes without being forced to switch overnight.
Lenders and appraisal management companies have until November 2, 2026, to fully implement UAD 3.6. While this phased approach creates breathing room for system updates and staff training, it also introduces a period of mixed requirements that could be confusing for both appraisers and lenders.
Software vendors and large lenders are racing to update their platforms, with some taking a “first mover” stance on UAD 3.6. Smaller lenders tend to sit back and watch how early adopters navigate the inevitable hiccups. As a result, appraisers may face varying expectations depending on which lender or AMC they’re working with during the transition.
The scope of these changes is so broad that both GSEs partnered with leading education providers on a sevenhour continuing education course. They recognize that appraisers need thorough, standardized training to master the new data fields, digital workflows, and report structures.
This article will highlight the most consequential developments in UAD 3.6 and the redesigned URAR, share insights from industry leaders, and outline the key areas appraisers should monitor over the next 18 months.
Here’s what we know so far, and what it means for practicing appraisers.
The Dynamic URAR Everyone’s Talking About
One of the most notable features of the redesigned URAR is its dynamic, adaptive format. As appraisers enter data, the form expands or contracts to match the property and assignment, replacing legacy forms like 1004, 2055, and 1073 with a single, responsive report.
This change isn’t limited to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The VA and FHA helped develop the new dataset and are expected to adopt UAD 3.6 and the URAR, though their rollout timelines are still unclear. Once the new format
becomes standard for governmentbacked loans, private lenders are likely to follow. Within 12 to 18 months, it’s expected that over 95 percent of residential mortgage appraisals will use this updated report, marking one of the most widespread shifts in appraisal documentation in decades.
In August 2025, Working RE attended Valuation Expo, hosted by Appraiser eLearning. As the largest gathering of appraisers, vendors, and valuation professionals in the country, this year’s event was among the biggest in recent history. The hottest topic of conversation there? UAD 3.6 and the new URAR.
Nearly half the conference presentations centered on the redesigned report format. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac sent senior valuation leaders to speak directly with appraisers and lenders about the transition. In the expo hall, a wave of new vendors showcased their solutions, including several startup appraisal software providers, some led by entrepreneurs in their 20s and 30s eager to bring fresh technology to the profession.
A few vendors made bold claims that their platforms could complete an appraisal in just two to three minutes using artificial intelligence to scan the house on the inspection walkthrough. The rooms hummed with a combination of excitement and skepticism towards this new era of appraisal reporting and the technological solutions that are being put forth to assist appraisers.
Val Expo hosted a number of town hall style discussions with valuation leaders from both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as several lenders and technology providers, to help share the perspectives behind this change.
The transformation isn’t just about updating a form. It’s about rethinking how appraisers tell the story of a property. Lyle Radke, Senior Director of Collateral Policy at Fannie Mae, recalls that serious conversations about
“While narrative commentary still has a place, the new format prioritizes clarity and consistency through structured inputs. Reuter notes that this shift will reduce revision requests and save time for both lenders and appraisers.”
redesigning the Uniform Residential Appraisal Report (URAR) began as early as 2013. “Everything in the old URAR was designed around a piece of paper,” he explains. “We just took what we had and digitized it. But that is not how society works anymore.”
The redesigned URAR, part of the UAD 3.6 rollout, shifts the focus from static forms to dynamic, data-driven reporting. Instead of cramming commentary into unstructured addenda, appraisers now select from defined data elements, structured fields that expand or contract based on the property and assignment. “We’ve defined these data elements with specific enumerations,” Radke says. “Appraisers can be very efficient and very fast at this. You can’t do that on paper.”
Scott Reuter, Chief Appraiser at Freddie Mac, echoes that sentiment. “We’re making a significant change to the whole ecosystem,” he says. “We’re not just updating a form … we’re providing a data set.” While narrative commentary still has a place, the new format prioritizes clarity and consistency through structured inputs. Reuter notes that this shift will reduce revision requests and save time for both lenders and appraisers. “Appraisers do a great job telling the story, but if you put those explanations into the unstructured addendum, it’s hard to find,” he explains. “Lenders get frustrated trying to locate specific commentary, and appraisers get frustrated when they’re asked to clarify something they already included.”
Technology plays a key role in making this transition smoother. Both Radke and Reuter emphasize the value of mobile tools for collecting data
during inspections. “Working in an app when you’re at the property is the way you’re going to want to work,” Radke advises. Reuter adds, “If I ever got back in the field, I’d find someone half my age and learn technology. It’s really going to facilitate the new report.”
Ultimately, the goal is for higher appraisal quality and consistency across the industry. “By capturing discrete data analytics, we’re clearly signaling to the world what the standard is,” Reuter says. Radke agrees, noting that Fannie Mae tracks internal quality metrics like defect rates and overvaluation risk, and expects those numbers to improve. “If we can drive those numbers down through appraisal quality, that’s good for the lender and that’s good for us,” he says. This is both a technical upgrade and a cultural shift in how appraisers communicate value.
A Challenging Transition
Despite the optimism, both GSE leaders acknowledged that the transition will not be without challenges. Reuter described the process as “having a steep learning curve,” even for those who are enthusiastic about the change. “End-to-end across the process, you’re learning something new,” he said. “The goal is to become much more efficient as time goes on, but in the short term, you’ll need to double back on technology and entertain new tools to help you along the way.”
Radke added that appraisers should be thoughtful about how they integrate new technologies into their workflow. “If you try to adopt everything all at once, it’s going to make the learning curve harder. We should be asking
ourselves: Am I using the right tech? How do I measure homes? Those are the kinds of questions appraisers need to consider as they transition.”
Perhaps the most profound change lies in how the new dataset reshapes traditional areas of appraisal practice, especially market analysis and adjustments. Both Radke and Reuter agreed that while many appraisers excel at comp selection, the bigger challenges often lie in adjustment support and neighborhood analysis. “We see several problems with appraisals,” Radke noted. “Not every appraisal, but we think everyone is pretty well-versed on the comp selection problem. The bigger problem with valuation support is your adjustment rates: where did that adjustment rate come from? Why did you decide to adjust for that particular amount?”
He warned that appraisers who “cut corners” in their development process will be more exposed under UAD 3.6, while those who rigorously support their adjustments will benefit.
Reuter added that the redesigned URAR transitions the “Neighborhood” section into a broader “Market Analysis,” putting greater emphasis on how appraisers interpret market trends and apply them in support of their conclusions. “If you’re weak on how you develop your adjustment rates, you can go take a class. Find better techniques that will make you better prepared when 3.6 comes into play,” Reuter advised.
GSE leaders understand that the new UAD framework represents a shift toward a more digital, data-driven future for appraisers. Ken DeFeo of Freddie Mac reminded the industry that change is constant. “Twenty years ago, AVMs were going to put us out of business, yet here we are,” he said. “If we didn’t think this dataset was going to live on and keep moving forward, we wouldn’t have spent eight years building it.”
Sean Pensiero of Fannie Mae highlighted the technical backbone of
the redesign: JSON-readable, APIcompliant, and built for seamless integration. “That means fewer revision requests and greater transparency, because both humans and machines can read and validate the appraisal,” he explained. DeFeo added that this structure boosts credibility across the board. With the GSEs laying the groundwork, the next challenge is whether lenders will adapt quickly enough to keep pace with the new system.
Lender Perspective
One of the quieter, but important, shifts in UAD 3.6 is how lenders will order appraisals. Under the old system, form numbers acted as shorthand: lenders could tell if a property was a condo, single-family home, or manufactured housing simply by the form type. That shorthand also helped determine scope of work and fee schedules, with pricing often tied to the complexity implied by the form.
Currently, lenders rely heavily on manual review and commentary buried in addenda to understand the nuances of an appraisal. If something’s unclear, they request revisions (sometimes multiple rounds) which slow down the process and frustrate both sides. “Clicks cost us money,” said Jessica Jenkins Tomé of Freedom Mortgage. “Revisions cost us money. This new format allows us to reduce that quite a bit. Less revisions, more targeted revisions.”
With UAD 3.6, lenders must now explicitly define property type and scope of work when ordering an appraisal. That shift will require clearer communication upfront, but it also unlocks more structured data on the back end. Instead of hunting through narrative sections, lenders will be able to validate key details through discrete fields, reducing ambiguity and speeding up review time.
Jenkins Tomé added that the benefits extend to borrowers: “Our customers really want speed and accuracy. Less
repurchase demands, less revisions, and reduced cost.” While the rollout may cause short-term friction, she believes early adoption will ease the transition. “If I refuse to adapt, it’s going to take longer. Maybe it’s a good idea that folks participate ahead of time.”
As lenders rethink how they order and review appraisals, software developers are also reimagining the tools appraisers will use to complete them, ushering in a more transparent, efficient ecosystem for everyone involved.
Software Views
For software developers, the new URAR represents a fundamental shift in how appraisal reports are built, delivered, and experienced. “The 3.6 Report is a completely different approach,” says Matt Krodel, Principal of Product Management at a la mode. “It’s not a static form anymore. If something doesn’t apply, it won’t even show up.” That dynamic structure required a full rethink of how the report behaves, as well as the ability to know what other developers navigating the same terrain will need.
From a practical standpoint, Krodel says the valuation process itself won’t change, but the way appraisers input and structure their data will. “The analysis is the same. The information is the same. What’s going to be different is that more of that data now has a specific place that it needs to go. In the past, appraisers included all the extra details in an addendum after the main form, each appraiser with their own arrangement of the information in whatever way they saw fit. One of the challenges will be getting used to where the data goes—what section, where the photos go,” he notes. This restructuring also creates opportunities for software to guide appraisers more naturally through the workflow, easing the learning curve.
Jeff Bradford, founder and CEO of Bradford Technologies, says that his firm chose to look at the new URAR
as an opportunity. “We saw that the GSEs were blowing up the world. They were creating a unique inflection point where every software vendor had to build new software,” he said. “We asked ourselves: We are a forms provider, do we keep building form-filling tools, or do we use our technology to do more and truly improve the appraisal experience? We chose the latter. Instead of just building new form filling software which is used at the end of the appraisal process, we decided to apply next generation technology to the appraisal process. Our goal is to improve the appraisal process by making it more efficient, more supportable and eliminating as many time-consuming tasks as possible. One of those tedious tasks is form-filling to create the report. In our system, the report is automatically generated.”
The way appraisers enter and organize data is evolving fast. Bradford adds, “With UAD 3.6, you go out to the property and you’re collecting everything—not just what contributes to value.” This restructuring opens the door for smarter, more intuitive software. “We said we’re either going to sink or swim. The road we picked was difficult, but we came out the other side with a product that set the foundation for the future. There is so much information available; artificial intelligence will play a role; mobile apps with LiDAR scanning will become the norm. What we are seeing today is the tip of the iceberg. We are entering a new era of appraisal software. So much data needs to be collected in the field, so you definitely need a mobile solution. Software that not only helps produce the report, but assists the appraiser in performing the appraisal. I think it’s an exciting time to be an appraiser,” Bradford says.
With the limited production date in September, all the software providers are racing to prepare, but rumor has it that very few are currently
ready, and the majority of the leading software vendors plan to be equipped by November or December 2025.
Liability Considerations
Another concern among appraisers is whether the expanded detail and data fields in the new URAR could expose them to greater liability. Brianna Walker, Senior Underwriter at OREP Insurance, shares many of the questions she hears stem from buyer-initiated demands and lawsuits. “Case law in much of the country is friendly to appraisers when it comes to buyerinitiated suits. In a standard mortgage appraisal, the buyer isn’t the client and generally has no private right of action against the appraiser. They’re a third party. That doesn’t stop buyers from filing claims, though—we regularly see litigation that alleges the appraiser failed to identify property defects. It’s essentially the ‘you did a bad home inspection’ type of complaint,” Walker explains.
Will UAD 3.6 increase those types of claims? Possibly, Walker cautions. “With more fields and more data points—roof condition and age, appliance functionality, and so on—there are simply more details for buyers to latch onto when something goes wrong. We may see a slight uptick in complaints or demands as homeowners look for someone to blame. But we don’t expect a significant change in overall exposure or claim counts. Still, we’ll be monitoring it closely and will likely recommend additional disclaimers and disclosures for OREP Members to include in their reports,” Walker says.
Advice for Appraisers
To wrap things up, Working RE talked to Hal Humphreys, partner at Appraiser eLearning and a seasoned instructor, to get his take on how appraisers are responding to UAD 3.6 and the redesigned URAR. Humphreys
has taught the GSEs’ new course nationwide and says he’s seen plenty of fear—but also a shift once appraisers dug in.
“When I start every class, I ask how many plan to retire once the new URAR is mandatory. Anywhere from 15 to 50 percent raise their hands,” he says. “By the end of the class, usually nobody does. Or maybe a couple but they were going to retire anyway. Once folks start digging into it, I think it’s very doable.”
Humphreys’ advice? Take the class and start using mobile tech. “Don’t try to take notes. Just listen. And if you’re not using a mobile process now, start today. It’s not mandatory, but it’s highly recommended. Mobile inspection apps are the perfect checklist. Without them, you’ll forget things and spend way more time later.”
While the new data fields may make inspections longer at first, Humphreys believes that comfort with mobile tools will help appraisers maintain efficiency. “Once you’re back at the office, you’re not transcribing notes or doing a sketch; it’s already done. You can focus on market analysis and adjustments.”
For appraisers, the next 12 months represent both a challenge and an opportunity. The new URAR marks one of the most significant changes in residential appraisal in decades, and while there is definitely a consensus as to its long-term benefits, the adjustment won’t be effortless.
As Hal Humphreys emphasizes, the learning curve is real, and the shift in workflow and data collection can feel overwhelming at first.
Appraisers can move through whatever discomfort they might find, and evolve with the profession, and you don’t need to do it alone. Starting early will leave you better equipped to navigate the transition and help shape how the new standards take root across the profession. WRE
Real learning requires human imagination and exploration. That’s why we write our own words and speak in our own voices. Our courses, podcasts, webinars, and articles are created by smart, experienced people, not chatbots. After all, AI’s just a cover band. Humans are the musicians.
EDUCATION BY APPRAISERS, FOR APPRAISERS
appraiserelearning.com
“Plaintiffs make an argument that Henley, and U.S. Bank, undervalued the Turner’s home because of Daviola-Turner’s national origin—i.e. because she is a Canadian with permanent residency in the United States.”
Case Dismissed: Ohio Appraiser Wins Discrimination Lawsuit
by Isaac Peck, Publisher
In the past four years, more than a half dozen lawsuits have been filed against real estate appraisers alleging discrimination. Several have settled quietly for high-five or low six-figure sums. But in two recent high-profile cases, courts have dismissed the claims outright— handing significant legal victories to the appraisers involved.
In Daviola-Turner v. Henley Appraisals LLC et al, Judge Walter Rice of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio granted Henley’s Motion to Dismiss—effectively ending the Turners’ appraisal discrimination lawsuit.
Separately, in Connolly and Mott v. Lanham et al in Maryland, the court also dismissed the plaintiffs’ case against appraiser Shane Lanham (see pg. 38 for full coverage).
Below are the details on the Ohio discrimination case and why it matters for the appraisal profession.
Background
One of the unique things about this case is that the plaintiffs, Carlos Turner and Diana Davoli-Turner, allege that Kevin Henley, owner of Henley Appraisals LLC, not only discriminated against Carlos Turner because he is an African American, but that Henley also discriminated against Diana DavoliTurner because she is a Canadian citizen. Plaintiffs make an argument that Henley, and U.S. Bank, undervalued the Turner’s home because of DaviolaTurner’s national origin—i.e. because she is a Canadian with permanent residency in the United States.
The allegation of anti-Canadian sentiment is a new one on the appraisal discrimination landscape!
The Turners first purchased their home for $442,000 in November 2020 and they argue they made substantial improvements to the property, including finishing the basement at a cost of over $30,000.
Then in March 2022, the Turners inquired with their current lender about doing a cash-out refinance on their home, seeking to pull out $60,000 in home equity. Their original lender then had the home appraised and that appraisal returned with a value of $520,000. However, the Turners failed to lock in their rate and began shopping for better rates and terms. After observing an advertisement from U.S. Bank for low-interest rates, the Turners applied with U.S. Bank and began trying to complete the refinance transaction with U.S. Bank.
After encountering several denials from U.S. Bank based on, among other things, what U.S. Bank called a “history of delinquency,” U.S. Bank ordered a drive-by appraisal that valued the home at $485,000, and ultimately Henley was hired to do a full appraisal of the property, which returned a valuation of $470,000.
In their complaint, the Turners allege that Henley believed that “they did not belong in Springboro, a predominantly white city” and that because of his discriminatory beliefs, he did not select similar homes throughout the neighborhood and was biased in how he selected his comparables.
After a denied request for a Reconsideration of Value and a great deal of negotiating, the Turners eventually received a home equity line of credit of $34,363 with a variable interest rate, which the Turners now say is over 10 percent interest.
Non-Profit Involvement
In a similar fashion to many other discrimination cases against appraisers, the Turners were joined in this lawsuit by Miami Valley Fair Housing Center (MVFHC), a non-profit dedicated to fair housing in Dayton, Ohio. After consulting with MVFHC, the Turners decided to “whitewash” their home, which they define as when “a black homeowner removes markers of black identity, such as family photographs, from their home and enlists a white person to stand in as the homeowner while an appraiser is present, thereby making it seem to the appraiser that the house is owned by white people.”
This subsequent appraisal was conducted in May 2023, over a year after Henley’s appraisal, and returned with an appraised value of $655,000. This, along with the first appraisal the Turners received at $520,000, prove that Henley’s appraisal was “grossly inconsistent with appraisal guidelines and principles and that their excuses for devaluing the Turner Plaintiffs’ home were invalid and pretextual,” the Turners argue.
Case Against Henley Dismissed
Over a year after the Turner’s litigation was initially filed, Judge Walter H. Rice, one of the longest-tenured federal judges in Ohio who was first appointed in 1980 by Jimmy Carter, granted Henley’s Motion to Dismiss the Turner’s claim for insufficient evidence.
Rice ultimately ruled that the Turners’ accusations against Henley are “conclusory” rather than factual. In the legal sense, a conclusory allegation is one that asserts a claim or accusation without providing sufficient supporting
facts or evidence to make it plausible or actionable in court.
A portion of Rice’s decision is worth quoting at length (emphasis added):
While the Henley appraisal resulted in a valuation $185,000 lower than the one conducted a year later … Plaintiffs conclude that this must mean that the valuation is unreasonable, they lack sufficient factual allegations to adequately plead this claim. Plaintiffs here include no such allegations about similarly situated homeowners who were also appraised by Henley. While there is no requirement that Plaintiffs must provide allegations that detail disparate impact or direct evidence of the discrimination, the Court is not required to blindly ignore the obvious alternative theory: that Henley honestly thought the property was worth the amount that he appraised it for. Merely stating that Henley discriminated against the Turners, is insufficient as a matter of law under Rule 8(a).
Rice reasons that because the Turners lack a factual basis upon which to plead their discrimination allegations against Henley, that all their causes of action must also be dismissed.
In a somewhat surprising turn of events, Rice allowed the Turner’s case against U.S. Bank to continue. Here, Rice declares that all the Turner’s arguments that are based on the Henley appraisal being discriminatory are “unsustainable,” but writes about the Turner’s second argument, that U.S. Bank’s “own process was discriminatory, may yet provide a well-pleaded claim.” This claim is related more specifically to U.S. Bank’s denial of the Turner’s initial application, as well as their decisions around extending credit to the Turners. On this basis, the Turner’s lawsuit against U.S. Bank is continuing.
Appraiser Experience
When Working RE reached out to Henley for a comment, his view of the situation was direct.
“Basically, the borrower did not like their value. They did not like the appraisal, which was reviewed. They did not like another appraisal by an appraiser for the bank. We are in a time where if a borrower does not like the appraised value, they can just go out and sue appraisers and lenders,” Henley observes.
To his credit, Henley had secured his E&O with an insurance program that offered sufficient appraisal discrimination coverage. “Luckily, my insurance policy (through OREP Insurance Bit.ly/app-discrimination) includes racial discrimination coverage. I hope other appraisers do not have to face such erroneous and frivolous lawsuits or accusations. And if they do, I hope they have adequate coverage,” Henley reports.
The coverage distinction noted by Henley is particularly important—since many appraiser E&O policies either exclude discrimination claims outright or contain inadequate discrimination coverage limits. Some of OREP’s main competitors only provide $50,000 or $100,000 in Discrimination Claim Coverage. (OREP’s base policy includes $200,000, with up to $500,000 available upon request.)
“My insurance company (OREP) did a fantastic job organizing my defense,” Henley says. “The representation knew there was no basis for such an outrageous claim. I definitely appreciate OREP for standing by their policy on racial discrimination lawsuits. If other appraisers question how good their insurance company may be, I can speak firsthand—OREP went to task immediately and retained a great firm who are experts in this type of litigation,” Henley shares.
Despite his victory in court, Henley says his business was still affected negatively because some of his clients
passed judgement before all the facts came out. “Appraisers need to be aware certain lenders will remove you from their Appraiser Roster without having a final verdict. I probably lost 30-50 percent in income because some lenders don’t follow the saying: ‘Innocent until proven guilty.’ That’s a shame because, as you know, I have been appraising [for] over 25 years and have been on some of their lists for over 20 years. I appreciate that my number one client kept me in business,” Henley says.
Non-Profit Funding
The involvement of the non-profit MVFHC in this case is indicative of a larger strategy wherein non-profits are routinely joining, and possibly financing, the litigation against appraisers. While Connolly and the late Mott, the plaintiffs in the widely publicized Maryland suit (and countersuit) were not joined in the case by a non-profit, many observers have raised questions about who paid for that litigation.
Connolly and the late Mott are represented by Relman Colfax, a leading fair housing law firm that has billed over $500,000 of work to The Appraisal Foundation (TAF) to advise on USPAP revisions. According to court records, Relman Colfax has billed 5,411 hours to the case at an average hourly rate of $583, with total expenditures reaching $3.15 million.
The suggestion that non-profits have been funding the litigation against appraisers is not unfounded. Tenisha Tate-Austin and Paul Austin in Marin County, California were backed by the Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California. And a separate, widely publicized settlement for $75,000 against an Oakland appraiser in April 2025 was also joined by the same non-profit.
Industry insiders have suggested that one possible repercussion of the fact that HUD is expected to dismiss many of the HUD discrimination complaints that have been hanging in limbo
“The suggestion that non-profits have been funding the litigation against appraisers is not unfounded.”
over appraisers’ heads for the last three years, is that interested parties on the left (non-profits in many cases) may finance litigation on what they perceive to be the strongest cases. When a regulatory solution fails, private litigation can solve it, the argument goes.
Funding Cuts
This private litigation strategy is complicated by the fact that the Trump administration has plans to cut the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding by $33 billion—nearly 40 percent of the total. HUD is currently a significant source of funds for non-profits dedicated to fair housing. Such drastic cuts, if effected, might potentially end Section 8 and other housing assistance programs, not to mention drying up resources that non-profits rely on to finance private litigation.
As part of Trump’s initial flurry of Executive Orders, a notable one for the appraisal profession is one that targeted DEI programs and funding specifically, including the following mandate:
“Terminate, to the maximum extent allowed by law, all…equity-related’ grants or contracts.” AND “Directs the OMB director to “[t]erminate all ‘diversity,’ ‘equity,’ ‘equitable decision-making,’ ‘equitable deployment of financial and technical assistance,’ ‘advancing equity,’ and like mandates, requirements, programs, or activities.”
In response to the current Administration’s executive orders and plans to cut HUD’s funding, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA), which is the organization that has been purchasing billboards portraying appraisers as discriminatory, together with
the National Urban League and the Aids Foundation of Chicago, has filed suit against Donald Trump and the Administration, arguing that because of the Executive Order, they are “at significant risk of losing federal funds that they use to help people of color, women, LGBTQ people, and/or people with disabilities.”
While the NFHA acknowledges in its own court filing that only 27 percent of its funding comes from federal grants, the organization would still have sufficient resources to continue operating even if those funds were entirely eliminated. However, losing federal support would likely compel the NFHA to make difficult decisions about how to allocate its remaining resources and which initiatives to prioritize.
Landmark Victory
To our knowledge, this marks the first time an appraiser has achieved full vindication in court against discrimination allegations—a landmark victory. It’s a major win for the appraiser involved and a positive milestone for the entire profession.
The Lanham case in Baltimore— perhaps the most high-profile discrimination lawsuit against an appraiser—was also resolved just a few months later, with the court dismissing the discrimination claims against Lanham while also dismissing Lanham’s counterclaim of defamation against Connolly and the late Mott (Read page 38 for the full story). Together, these outcomes represent a significant turning point for the profession and may shape how future litigation on this issue develops.
Stay safe out there! WRE
“Barker insists that ‘the industry needs a brand’ capable of unifying fragmented practitioners under a trusted, scalable identity. This audacious endeavor not only empowers individual appraisers but promises to elevate the entire profession to unprecedented heights.”
Unlocking Success With an Appraiser Franchise? Interview With Chad Barker
by Isaac Peck, Publisher
Today’s appraisal landscape is full of headwinds: assignment pipelines are drying up, fees are shrinking, and UAD 3.6 (the latest, more detailed version of the Uniform Appraisal Dataset) has landed, bringing new mandatory data fields, tighter compliance checkpoints, and a brand new report format.
For most appraisers—who work solo day in and day out—it can feel like you’re paddling upstream without a paddle: you don’t have the volume for discounted software, you can’t flex pricing like larger outfits, and staying on top of evolving rules takes precious time. With margins pinched and workloads growing more complex, it’s easy to burn out. But there are options: tapping into appraisal networks for bulk purchasing power, streamlining your workflow with digital templates and automation, or teaming up for peer support and advocacy.
What about franchising? Could it empower appraisers? Franchising might help solo appraisers break through fragmentation and increase scale, offering unified branding, standardized training, and operational support. If appraisers join a franchise network, they might access collective advocacy, stronger fee negotiation, streamlined workflows, and shared technology—potentially boosting greater profit margins and reinforcing long-term market resilience.
We sat down with Chad Barker, founder and CEO of Velox Valuations (VeloxVal), about his business and mission to empower appraisers. Operating in 25 states, Velox uses its appraiserdirect model and VX-365 platform to streamline operations and deliver business intel to its professional network.
In our conversation, Barker emphasized three major challenges facing appraisers in today’s market: First is fragmentation. With tens of thousands of small, independent sole proprietors, it’s hard for appraisers to gain leverage, whether through having adequate volume or geographic coverage, or building a consistent service expectation around a recognizable brand (of which Barker has a lot to say).
Second, appraisers lack scale. Most operate alone or in very small teams, which means they miss out on the benefits of economies of scale, like shared marketing, access to better technology, and stronger client negotiation power. Being a brand of one or two people in a local market simply isn’t enough anymore.
Third, staying relevant is becoming more difficult because ever-changing technologies are distorting client expectations, making it hard for independent appraisers to keep up.
Barker emphasized that having a centralized, collaborative knowledge base is key to helping appraisers stay competitive. In his view, these three issues— fragmentation, lack of scale, and relevance—are the core challenges facing the profession today.
Background in Growth
Barker began his appraisal career in 1996 after earning a Finance and Economics degree from Indiana University’s Kelly School of Business. Over the next decade, he completed residential and small commercial appraisals full time while helping to expand the local, family-owned firm that employed him. He later moved into sales and operations, applying the systems he developed to
launch several successful appraisal ventures. Under his leadership, the original firm grew into the nation’s largest independent appraisal management company, with more than 600 employees and multiple regional offices. Subsequent strategic acquisitions by Fortune 500 and other large-cap firms introduced the organization to corporate America, providing valuable lessons in governance, scale, and industry integration.
Barker had built his original firm into “the largest non-captive AMC in the country,” with two operations centers. “Back then it was like 23,000+ appraisers on the panel,” he recalled. Over a calendar year, the company used 13,000–15,000 appraisers, with a core team of 8,000 handling roughly 40,000 appraisals per month. A series of strategic acquisitions brought every major lending client, large and small, to the AMC’s roster, converting it into a billion-dollar enterprise. Barker led operations through this transformation, noting that shifting “from bootstrapping a business to operating in Big Corporate” provided the leadership team with a uniquely broad perspective.
In 2020, when the parent company divested its staff-appraiser division, Barker purchased it and launched VeloxVal on April Fools’ Day. As everyone now knows, that was the onset of the global COVID-19 pandemic.
“Out of the gate our business plan was to build an appraisal firm, not an AMC,” he explains. Facing a “baptism by fire” as appraisers were deemed essential, VeloxVal leveraged existing relationships to establish its brand and weather the crisis.
That period also exposed the industry’s fragmentation. As Barker observed, “Every appraiser is out there running a small business … trying to compete for the same clients.” This realization became the catalyst for VeloxVal’s mission: to unite individual practitioners under a collaborative, scalable model.
Not the Original Plan
Chad Barker said the franchise model wasn’t part of the original plan; it grew out of witnessing the strength of his appraisal team in their prior organization. He explained that his goal was to deepen “the direct relationship with the client” rather than leave appraisers with only “an indirect relationship” that limited their influence. Barker added that his vision was “to present the appraiser as the face of the company,” restoring a pre-crash model in which they were recognized as true subject-matter experts throughout each transaction.
Achieving the necessary scale and brand recognition meant embracing AMCs, direct lenders, attorneys, consumers, and other partners. This inclusiveness is “still true today,” Barker said. On recruitment, Barker observed that sustainable growth required either greater efficiency or increased headcount, so the firm targeted appraisers seeking employment and those eager to own their own business. He said the franchise model “combines independence with support,” enabling appraisers to maintain their entrepreneurial identity while accessing training, technology, and national branding, advantages already proven in the home inspection and real estate industries. By “bringing appraisers together as business owners,” Barker aimed to offer a flexible platform suited to every practitioner’s goals.
Barker contended that when you strip away all the tech and data aggregators, AVMs, regulators, and standards, then the real obstacle for appraisers “was a lack of structure,” not a deficit of data or skills. “We needed a cohesiveness that created an identity we could leverage,” he said, asking, “What was operating in the best interests of the appraiser other than the appraiser themselves?”
He argued that fragmentation was the industry’s core challenge. “Tens of thousands of independent sole proprietors lacked leverage from volume or geographic footprint,” he said. “Be-
ing a brand of one, two, or three was not sufficient scale anymore,” he said. Sympathetic to solo practitioners, his mindset centered on empowering appraisers through collaborative networks— shared knowledge bases, collective advocacy, and pooled resources—to restore their market voice and resilience.
Barker observed that pride often holds appraisers back, saying, “I don’t know if you knew this or not, but appraisers tend to be egotistical,” he said. Instead, he urged practitioners to “open your mind and embrace collaborative systems that provide scale and leverage.” Barker also called out slow tech adoption and adaptation: “Only about 25 percent of appraisers were using mobile technology in their inspections, which is not smart,” he said. Instead, success in real estate work today means adopting data analytics, aligning with a strong brand “to earn a seat at the table with your customers,” and expanding beyond the local market to build equity, capacity, and geographic reach.
“The Industry Needs a Brand”
The power of branding comes from what the company delivers. With great brand power comes great responsibility to make sure you’re living up to whatever hype you hope to generate. That’s what VeloxVal did: In a sweeping display of entrepreneurial vision, the company rewrote the rules for appraisal professionals nationwide. The company was built to deliver “business infrastructure to the appraiser,” supplying everything from operating manuals and client-support protocols to professionally developed marketing collateral and a community-outreach game plan that holds franchisees accountable. Recognizing that most independent appraisers find marketing “expensive, time-consuming, and requiring expertise,” VeloxVal consolidated appraisal spend and equipped members page 188
with its patent-pending VX-365 platform—aggregating transaction data into actionable business intelligence that pinpoints “where and when to grow and then with whom.”
Chad Barker further amplified this transformative model with a relentless focus on “training and ongoing mentorship” and by granting franchisees immediate access to VeloxVal’s customer base. With nearly 100,000 residential appraisals completed each month nationwide, he projects the system could “support hundreds of franchises with a combined workforce in the thousands.” By setting clear expectations for reliability, caliber, and timeliness—areas where standalone appraisers often leave clients guessing— Barker insists that “the industry needs a brand” capable of unifying fragmented practitioners under a trusted, scalable identity. This audacious endeavor not only empowers individual appraisers but promises to elevate the entire profession to unprecedented heights.
We asked Barker to explain more about the importance of a strong brand. In his answers, he stressed that when appraisers “adopt brand value,” they instantly become “VeloxVal appraisers” in the eyes of clients. He said customers view them not as lone practitioners but as part of a recognized national firm—an identity that carries expectations of quality, reliability, and scale. “When we sign an appraiser up with our customers,” Barker explained, “those clients know exactly what to expect.”
He contrasted this with the fate of unknown firms. “Imagine I’m XYZ Appraisal Company that nobody has ever heard of,” he said. “I hire an employee no one has met, and the leadership at my clients’ organizations still doesn’t know my brand from Adam.” Over time, VeloxVal’s consistent track record “proves out a certain level of service and quality,” Barker noted, which earns “the trust of the brand”—a trust that solo appraisers often struggle to achieve on their own.
That brand equity, Barker argued, “translates into higher fees and more work.” He offered a simple comparison: “If I’m Barker Appraisals LLC, I can say, ‘I serve four counties.’ Versus, ‘We’re VeloxVal—we operate in 25 states, cover 700 counties, and complete thousands of appraisals every month.’ Which value proposition sounds more compelling?”
Ultimately, Barker insisted, “We have to come together so we can be meaningful to our customers in terms of capacity and geographic reach.” By uniting under a strong brand, independent appraisers gain the leverage, recognition, and collective scale needed to compete— and thrive—in today’s marketplace.
Customer and staff reviews can also help sustain a brand, if they say the right things. Reviews by employees on Glassdoor say the company offers “a culture of measured growth and support” and is “modern and innovative” and a “great work environment.” One staff appraiser noted, “Don’t let the base salary fool you—this has been a six-figure job for me every year,” highlighting the firm’s bonus structure and autonomy in scheduling. A client review on Angi says that “Velox completed the pre-listing appraisal on the home I just sold! They made the process real simple and it was worth every dollar spent because we received full asking price.”
Saying Yes to the Franchise Model
Barker has no reservations about preaching the franchise model. He told me he believes it is “the perfect solution because it combines independence with support. Appraisers still own their business and build equity, but they also gain access to the systems, marketing, training, and technology that Velox provides. It’s about giving appraisers the ability to scale like a national firm without losing their identity as business owners. The franchise approach creates synergy, scalability, and marketing leverage across the entire network.”
Barker’s conviction rests on solid market trends. While most of the roughly 360,000 U.S. brokerages remain independently owned, the 20 largest real-estate franchise brands captured about 46.5 percent of total U.S. sales volume in 2021, suggesting that a unified network can drive outsized market share.
Then there’s the issue of regulatory complexity: Lenders and AMCs demand consistent compliance with evolving standards, whether in UAD 3.6 fields or federal bias rules or something else. A franchise can build centralized checklists, training videos, and live audits to ensure every member meets the same standard. Solo practitioners often scramble to interpret new rules on their own. But a networked model can deliver instant updates on regulations, court decisions, agency rule changes, and so on.
Technology investment also favors scale. Property technology providers are constantly rolling out new shiny things: automated sketch tools, remote-inspection platforms, and analytics dashboards and the list goes on. These products cost a lot of money, certainly more than many one-person shows can afford. But put 200 or 300 franchisees together, and the peruser price drops by as much as 70–80 percent. Franchisees simply plug in, rather than having to shop for and integrate each tool individually.
Finally, Barker points out the client outreach advantage. A brand with 500 locations can promise national coverage and consistent turnaround times—two qualities that national lenders prize. As mortgage volume rebounds after a slow patch, those assurances translate to higher assignment volume and fee premiums.
Together these forces validate Barker’s premise: the franchise model is neither gimmick nor fad, but a practical blueprint. It equips solo appraisers with the brand recognition, compliance backbone, and technology partnerships they need to compete and thrive as the appraisal industry continues to evolve. WRE
Comprehensive
Coverage
for today’s litigious environment (including Discrimination Claims).
“Consumers and appraisers alike deserve accuracy, not euphemisms, when it comes to understanding whether an independent appraisal has been performed.”
Beyond Terminology: What Fannie Mae’s Selling Guide Updates Mean for Appraisers
by Scott DiBiasio, Director of Government Affairs, Appraisal Institute
F annie Mae recently issued important updates to its Selling Guide that may look like technical revisions but have significant implications for appraisers, consumers, and the valuation profession. The most visible changes involve the retirement of the term “appraisal waiver” in favor of “value acceptance” and adjustments to the Reconsideration of Value (ROV) process. Together, these changes reflect the GSEs’ modernization priorities—but also highlight the ongoing tension between efficiency and transparency.
From “Appraisal Waiver” to “Value Acceptance”
Fannie Mae has decided to eliminate the term “appraisal waiver” from the Selling Guide, replacing it entirely with “value acceptance.” Even the parenthetical “(appraisal waiver)” has been removed. The stated goal is to unify industry language and create consistency across the valuation spectrum.
That may sound harmless, but let’s be clear: the average consumer is not going to recognize that “value acceptance” means their lender has waived an appraisal altogether. That lack of clarity undermines transparency at a critical stage of the lending process.
The Appraisal Institute (AI) will absolutely continue to call these products what they are: appraisal waivers. Language matters. Consumers and appraisers alike deserve accuracy, not euphemisms, when it comes to understanding whether an independent appraisal has been performed.
Reconsideration of Value: Streamlining vs. Transparency
The Selling Guide changes also revise handling ROVs. Two elements stand out:
1. The initial disclosure of ROV rights at loan application has been eliminated. 2. Borrowers will now receive disclosure only when the appraisal report is delivered.
Documentation requirements have also been pared back so that lenders need only retain outcome-related records, not initiation documents.
Simplification may reduce lender burden, but the initial notice had value. A better approach would be to notify consumers up front that, if an appraisal is required, they will receive it at least three days before closing, along with clear notice of their ROV rights. That’s the point in the process when the information is most relevant and when borrowers still have time to act.
Waiver Expansion + Borrower Impact
The terminology shift comes against the backdrop of steadily expanding waiver eligibility. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac now allow appraisal waivers
Scott W. DiBiasio is the Director of Government Relations for the Appraisal Institute, where he leads federal, state, and local advocacy efforts on real estate valuation and housing finance issues. He oversees the team that works with Congress, federal agencies, state legislatures, and appraisal boards, managing advocacy strategies, grassroots engagement, and policy development. With extensive legislative and regulatory experience, he is dedicated to protecting the integrity of the appraiser licensing system and advancing professional standards in the valuation profession.
on purchase loans up to 90 percent LTV, and on loans up to 97 percent LTV when combined with property data collection.
Since 2020, appraisal waivers have saved borrowers more than $2.5 billion in fees. And while actual usage remains modest—just one to two percent of loans in early 2025—the trajectory is clear: appraisal alternatives are here to stay, and their footprint is growing.
For consumers, that may mean lower costs and faster turn times. For appraisers, it reinforces the need to pivot away from being seen only as data gatherers and toward being recognized as indispensable analysts of complex valuation problems.
The Rise of Property Data and Hybrid Models
A related development is the increasing use of Uniform Property Dataset (UPD) collections. These involve trained data collectors compiling photos, floor plans, and other property details for lender submission. When paired with automated risk models, UPDs often allow lenders to bypass a full appraisal—or to commission a hybrid appraisal in which the appraiser focuses on analysis rather than inspection.
UPDs and hybrids are attractive to lenders because they are cheaper and faster than traditional appraisals. But their growth raises important questions about independence, accountability, and quality.
For appraisers, these models represent both a challenge and an opportunity. The challenge is adapting to a reduced role in property inspection. The opportunity is to demonstrate the analytical expertise that neither algorithms nor third-party data collectors can provide.
Why This Matters for Appraisers
Taken together, the Selling Guide updates and the expansion of waiver-based models point to several key takeaways:
“Language shapes perception. If consumers don’t recognize that value acceptance is an appraisal waiver, transparency suffers. That’s why AI will continue to call these products by their true name.”
1. Language shapes perception. If consumers don’t recognize that value acceptance is an appraisal waiver, transparency suffers. That’s why AI will continue to call these products by their true name.
2. Efficiency is not clarity. Simplifying disclosures may ease compliance for lenders, but it risks reducing borrower awareness of their rights.
3. Modernization is accelerating. With waivers, UPDs, and hybrid appraisals expanding, appraisers must adapt their skills to remain at the center of the valuation process.
4. Incursion is real. Regulators, property data collectors, and third-party vendors are positioning themselves between appraisers and their clients. The profession cannot afford to cede ground.
Equipping Yourself for the Future
Adapting to these developments requires more than awareness; it requires preparation. The Appraisal Institute is committed to providing appraisers with the tools they need to succeed through a new series of companion courses to the Uniform Residential Appraisal Report (URAR) and UAD 3.6:
• Supporting Adjustments and Reporting the Sales Comparison Approach (3 hours)—Explore real-world case studies to support adjustments and strengthen reconciliation.
• Reporting Market Analysis and Better Understanding the New URAR (4 hours)—Learn how to integrate robust market analysis into your reports while meeting evolving GSE compliance requirements.
These programs are designed to ensure appraisers are not only compliant with modernization requirements but also positioned as leaders in the valuation space.
Conclusion
Fannie Mae’s Selling Guide updates are about more than wordsmithing. They reflect the broader recalibration of valuation in the mortgage process: a shift toward efficiency and data that risks reducing clarity for consumers.
As professional advocates for appraisers, we will continue to call appraisal waivers what they are. We will continue to push for transparency in borrower disclosures. And we will continue to fight against incursion into the profession by regulators, property data collectors, and other third parties who seek to diminish the role of the independent appraiser.
Modernization is not the end of the appraisal profession. It is the next chapter. With the right tools, training, and a strong voice for advocacy, appraisers can shape that chapter for the better — ensuring both the strength of our profession and the protection of the public trust. WRE
The #1 source of real estate appraisal information and appraisal news.
Subscription included with OREP Membership (visit OREP.org).
“Appraisers who had built direct client relationships over decades suddenly found themselves offered assignments at less than half their former rates— sometimes under $200.”
An AMC as a Partner to Appraisers and Lenders? Interview With Jessie Ruckel
by Isaac Peck, Publisher
A ppraisal management companies (AMCs) have long been a point of contention in the valuation profession. Since gaining prominence after the 2008 financial crisis and the introduction of appraiser independence rules under HVCC and Dodd-Frank, AMCs have often been viewed with suspicion—and in many cases, outright hostility—by appraisers.
The reasons are well known. As AMCs rapidly grew their market share in the years following the crash, many leveraged their position to drive fees down. Appraisers who had built direct client relationships over decades suddenly found themselves offered assignments at less than half their former rates—sometimes under $200. The resentment was understandable and widespread.
Though appraisal fees eventually rebounded and even surged during the COVID-19 “boom years” of 2020–2022, today’s environment tells a different story. With interest rates at their highest levels in decades, appraisal volume has plummeted, leaving both appraisers and AMCs scrambling for business. Meanwhile, the AMC sector itself has consolidated, with the five largest firms controlling more market share than ever. In this climate, aggressive “low-fee” bidding strategies have resurfaced, evoking memories of the post-2008 downturn.
However, AMCs that take a different approach to their relationship with appraisers still exist—AMCs that see the value of high-quality appraisal work, diligently vet their appraiser pan-
els on quality and service metrics, and firmly believe in the motto of “you get what you pay for” when it comes to real estate appraising.
A chief advocate of this perspective is Jessie Elizabeth Ruckel, SRA, CML, an appraiser herself since 1990 and the founder of Independent Appraisal Management Company (dba iappraisal), a regional AMC in Texas. What makes Ruckel’s firm unique is its commitment to redefining the AMC model: acting as a genuine partner to both appraisers and lenders by respecting the appraiser as the expert in their local market, paying fair fees, and delivering uncompromising quality.
Working RE: Tell us about your background and your company. How’d you get into appraising?
Jessie Ruckel: My background in real estate appraisal goes back to the late 1980s. I got into appraising by accident when I was in college in Ohio. I was a business finance student taking a class for extra credit, and it happened to be on real estate appraisal. I truly enjoyed the course and became interested in appraising as a career. My professor was a commercial appraiser seeking her MAI designation, and told me I had a knack for it. I went on to take all required real estate related classes, including law, finance, statistics, etc. I had the benefit of local professional appraisers (MAIs) teaching most of these classes. I began interning with a husband-and-wife team,
an MAI and RM (now SRA) [Appraisal Institute expertise designations]. I was so fortunate to start from the ground up, learning from such knowledgeable appraisers sharing their expertise and experience with me and providing quality training. I interned from 1988-1990, doing everything from pulling data at the county courthouse, accompanying the residential staff on inspections, running camera rolls to the local photo store for development (this was a LONG time ago!) and delivering completed reports to the local lenders. I obtained my license post-graduation and took a job at a regional savings and loan bank.
Being on staff at a lending institution, writing and eventually reviewing appraisals, and serving as the eyes and ears for the bank was a great experience for me. The residential appraisers worked on the same floor as the loan officers. I never had the experience of having loan officers try to coerce me. I worked for that family-owned lending institution for nearly 15 years. Then in 2005, they sold out to a large bank: RBS Citizens National Bank. It became clear to me that change was coming and the focus on residential real estate would be diminished so I decided to create my own company, a sole appraiser practice. Many of the loan officers who left after the RBS/Citizens acquisition moved on to other lending institutions. Those lenders, local and regional banks became my client base.
My relationships with these lending institutions, rather than individual mortgage brokers, allowed me to escape much of the pain of lost business that many appraisers in the industry felt at that time in the post-Dodd-Frank era.
I successfully ran my sole practice for 8 years before taking an opportunity to move to Texas to join forces with a fellow SRA to assist in growing his firm into the largest in Central Texas. Our client base was comprised of local and regional lenders who benefited from
“Our
clients didn’t experience those stories about price gouging and inability to procure an appraiser because of the relationship we had with our appraisers. We cultivated loyalty by developing mutual respect.”
processes and consistency afforded by the firm. Our clients received positive feedback from their local agent and builder referral partners who appreciated the relationship, professionalism and expertise.
Working RE: What made you want to start an AMC?
Ruckel: Given our reputation in the Austin / central Texas market, many of our clients would come to us and say: “We love working with your team. We love everything you do, i.e. how you have relationships with the builders and real estate brokers, how you’re involved in the Mortgage Bankers Association, the homebuilders association, the local Realtor association and so on.” They were experiencing pain points when they placed an order for an appraisal that was outside of our footprint. They weren’t receiving the same level of service or the same quality of report.
Some of these clients were using larger AMCs or appraiser selection portals. They didn’t really know who they were working with when placing business outside of the Austin / central Texas market. They had lost the level of communication, service and quality they had become accustomed to.
Eventually, iappraisal was launched— focused solely on Texas, with a mission to provide excellent service, create meaningful relationships with expert appraisers in local markets, offer counseling and guidance to both client and appraiser, and deliver high-quality products.
Having traveled the state for several years attending local appraiser meet-
ings and events, getting to know the local appraisers, and being involved in mortgage lending organizations, we built our appraisal panel organically, in relationship with like-minded appraisers having the skill set and local expertise understood and accepted by the local market participants.
We launched in December 2019, right before the COVID-19 pandemic. During the pandemic, we had several lenders come to us just looking for bodies to complete assignments. That was a lesson—we realized certain types of lenders perhaps weren’t a good fit for our model. Unlike our local and regional Texas focused clients who appreciated the benefits of our intentional appraisal management, those clients were simply looking for communication via a portal, not fully understanding and appreciating what was needed to procure a high-quality appraisal report. Issues such as not clearly conveying assignment conditions, understanding that the appraiser needs all relevant documents provided up front, and that without certain information, the appraiser can’t properly vet an assignment nor provide an appropriate bid. Part of our process is to ensure the appraiser is treated fairly so that they prioritize their relationship with us. This in turn benefits our client.
We successfully navigated the pandemic thanks to the loyalty and dedication of our panel of appraisers and our core clients. Our clients didn’t experience those stories about price gouging and inability to procure an appraiser because of the relationship we had with page 268
our appraisers. We cultivated loyalty by developing mutual respect.
Working RE: Tell us about your ideal clients and your ideal appraiser that you want on your appraiser panel?
Ruckel: Our ideal client has been local and regional lenders who appreciate a quality product and excellent communication. Lenders who value and appreciate having an AMC partner that is local and established in Texas.
We understand what our appraisers require to do their job well. Our clients are more interested in that intentional process rather than the speed of having a bid in two hours.
Our ideal appraiser has always been that individual with local geographic competency and the required skill set to complete a range of assignment types. Our appraisers are familiar with their local market participants, i.e., local agents, builders, etc. and are actively engaged in their respective markets. Many of our appraisers serve as educators in their markets, teaching classes at their local Realtor associations and leading educational offerings for local lenders. We look for appraisers that are willing to learn.
Working RE: What makes you different from your competitors (other AMCs) that are operating in your markets?
Ruckel: Intentionality. We are intentional with everything we do. When an assignment comes into our AMC, we review all associated documents provided and if relevant documents are missing that are pertinent to the assignment, we procure those documents before reaching out to an appraiser and asking them to review. What is it we are asking the appraiser to do? Would I as an appraiser feel comfortable reviewing an assignment
“We do not broadcast assignments to the lowest bidder. We do not look for the lowest priced appraiser. We go to the most reliable appraiser, with the appropriate competency and offer a fair fee.”
with missing documents or relevant information? I try to always put myself in the appraiser’s shoes and not put them in a position that I wouldn’t feel comfortable in. Our company prioritizes the appraiser, values their license and treats them with the respect they deserve.
We have real relationships with our appraisers. They don’t hesitate to speak up. They can easily get answers or discuss concerns by whatever form of communication they prefer! They often can’t do that with other, larger AMCs. Appraisers call in with questions or want to discuss a particular aspect of the assignment. We’re available and accessible in a way that many AMCs are not.
Working RE: Tell us about how you build your appraiser panels?
Ruckel: Our panel has been built organically through my own travels around the state of Texas. I’ve known many appraisers across the state for years, and peer recommendations are one of the most valuable ways we build our panel. We also receive referrals from lenders, real estate brokerages, and even top agents who know and understand who the local appraisal experts are in their markets.
I’m passionate about working with appraisers who are willing to learn— those who are willing to engage with their appraiser peers, and local market participants. We don’t just add an appraiser because they have a license in the county; we want to know and understand their skill set and how they communicate. Our expectation
is that appraisers engage with us and with their markets, and we’ll support them with whatever information they need in return.
At the end of the day, it’s an organic referral network—appraisers who not only do solid work themselves but can recommend trusted peers when needed—that makes our panels strong.
Working RE: Appraisers’ fees are a very hot topic. How do you compensate your appraisers and how does that affect quality?
Ruckel: We pay the appraiser the appropriate fee for the complexity of the assignment and then we add the fee for our service on top [of that]. We do not broadcast assignments to the lowest bidder. We do not look for the lowest priced appraiser. We go to the most reliable appraiser, with the appropriate competency and offer a fair fee. If the appraiser sees additional complexity which we were not aware, they tell us their fee, and we present the total fee to the lender. It’s that simple. Our lenders trust us. Sometimes we might have a market participant who is fee-sensitive, in which case often our appraiser partners will make a concession. Fees are not really an issue for us. Our clients demand reliability, consistency, communication and high-quality reports. They pay for a good appraiser, and they pay for good management.
Working RE: What is the valueadd and distinction between iAppraisal (niche, local AMC) versus a larger, national AMC?
Ruckel: It’s about the respect and understanding of the appraiser, and of what they’re being asked to do. It’s about being mindful of our clients and their needs and requirements as well. Both sides have guidelines, rules and regulations they need to be mindful of. We consider ourselves to be educators and partners with a model that is built on relationships and trust. Versus a transactional approach that says: you’ve got a license, we have an order, what’s the lowest fee that you will take to get the assignment? In this case, neither the appraiser nor the lender is ultimately treated well.
Working RE: What do your clients appreciate about you?
Ruckel: Our service and communication. The quality product we deliver.
Our relationship, guidance and expertise in appraisal management. We also offer a variety of custom management options and value-add services such as CE classes, education, custom panels, and in-depth appraisal consulting.
Our clients know that we interpret and facilitate quick, compliant, and effective communication with the appraisers. We know which appraisers to assign specific assignment types, for complexity and geographic competency. They are aware that iappraisal offers support and guidance to industry organizations like TMBA (I chair the local affiliates committee), the various local MBAs (I sit on the Austin MBA Board), HBA, Appraisal Institute, and Association of Texas Appraisers.
Working RE: Any final thoughts?
Ruckel: I think it’s so important for appraisers to be proactive and be educators out in their marketplace. That would be my hope and wish, really. I understand the frustration many appraisers have when they feel as though they don’t have a channel for meaningful communication with their clients. Be proactive. Help to educate those that you have relationships with in your market. Inform agents, lenders, homebuilders about options like iappraisal. Offer a solution, be a problem-solver.
There’s not just one AMC model. Educating lenders and agents about the distinction between different models of AMCs is important. Often, clients are not always aware of the options available to them. Explain why they might want to pick a local AMC to bring them a more intentional experience. WRE
“Market value is the price most potential buyers would pay for a property not the price an individual person would pay. Market equates to majority.”
Highest and Best— and the Highest Value
by Richard Hagar, SRA
D
o you want to make everybody happy in a real estate purchase and finance transaction? If so, then the appraisal’s value conclusion needs to come in at the highest value possible. Sellers are happy because they receive money. Lenders and mortgage brokers are happy because they have a large loan amount, and agents are happy because they receive a lofty commission based on the high price.
That being said, an appraiser’s job isn’t to value a property at its purchase price. Our job is to provide an accurate description of the market and subject property together with a market value conclusion properly supported by market data.
Market value is the price most potential buyers would pay for a property not the price an individual person would pay. Market equates to majority. There are appraisers out there who incorrectly state that they value property based on what a buyer is going to do with the property. In their view, if there’s an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) on the property and the buyer isn’t going to rent it out, then they fail to determine the ADU’s rental income or give the unit lesser value. If there’s an end-of-life single-family home on a site zoned multifamily, but the buyer plans on living in the house, some appraisers incorrectly
Richard Hagar, SRA, is an educator, author and owner of a busy appraisal office in the state of Washington. Hagar now offers his legendary adjustments course for CE credit in over 45 states through OREPEducation.org. The 7-hour online CE course “How to Support and Prove Your Adjustments” shows appraisers proven methods for supporting adjustments. OREP Members save on this approved coursework. Sign up today at OREPEducation.org Reach Richard Hagar via email at rh@richardhagar.com.
value the property as an SFR, ignoring the multi-family zoning. That example doesn’t result in market value, it determines the value for an individual buyer, based on their intentions. That’s not how this process works. It doesn’t matter what an individual pays for a property, an appraiser’s job is to support what the market would pay for the property, hence the term “market value” which leads to: the Highest and Best Use Analysis and its impact on achieving the highest value.
When I started appraising, I didn’t always pay close attention to the Highest and Best Use Analysis; why would I? The site was zoned single-family residential (SFR), the subject was an SFR, so check the box on the form, move on, and where’s my check? Unfortunately, back then I didn’t know what I didn’t know, working through the process of becoming an SRA with the Appraisal Institute (AI), I found out that I may have been doing things incorrectly—oh the shock and horror , but it does happen. In going through AI classes, I learned that the Highest and Best Use Analysis is the basis for properly determining the market value of a property. Without the analysis, the appraisal’s stated value conclusion is often an incorrect guess. The class taught me that the analysis helps examine the actions of the market, determine land value, depreciation & condition adjustments, and the contributory value of the improvements built on the site, all based on the actions of most buyers and sellers.
The Highest and Best Use Analysis is so important that students must take a thirty-hour class on the topic, a thirty-hour class on the site and cost approach, plus a sixty-hour class on the income approach before sitting down to take the test to become a Certified General appraiser—of which there’s a 50 percent failure rate.
Today’s value for a property is based on its future use or potential uses. How much would a property be worth if it could only be used for one day? Conversely, if a property could be used for 100-plus years, it would have a higher value. Most people would pay more for a property if they knew trees impacting a view are scheduled to be cut down, revealing an ocean view where none exists today. In other words, some of today’s value is tied to potential future uses including changes in the economy or a change in zoning. The more positive potential future components are, the higher the value today. This is why knowing what’s legally possible impacts today’s value.
Let’s break down the words “highest and best” and examine their impact. A proper analysis looks at the market and tries to determine what is the best current use and potential future uses that create the highest value today. Oddly enough, most appraisers do this all the time, we just don’t think of it in our daily work.
The starting point for achieving a high value is determining a property’s legal use. For most appraisals, the appraiser is not supposed to give value to illegal or prohibited uses, so we look at zoning for guidance. At this point, it doesn’t matter what improvements are on the site, the question is: what does zoning allow to be constructed on the site? The appraiser is trying to determine the highest value for the land; and that requires understanding the site’s legal use today and in the foreseeable future. Next, determine how much more the structure
“Today’s value for a property is based on its future use or potential uses. How much would a property be worth if it could only be used for one day? Conversely if a property could be used for 100-plus years, it would have a higher value.”
built on the site adds to the land value. The highest land value combined with the contributory value of the most ideal improvements produces the highest value conclusion; something that, you hope, will keep everybody happy.
The analysis is a two to three-step process:
1. Based on the legal or potential legalities and physical constraints, which of the potential uses results in the highest value for the site as if it were vacant?
2. Then, what type of building or improvement would add the greatest value to the site? Steps one and two should point to the use and structure that produces the highest value.
3. However, what if there’s a building on the site? How does the building match the theoretical highest valued structure for the site?
The highest land value combined with the highest building value should produce the highest total value. Unfortunately, not every lender likes the conclusion or the box the appraiser must check if things don’t ideally align. Let’s work through two examples. Take a site zoned commercial in a city that only allows commercial uses in a small area. While someone could build a house on the site, the house typically wouldn’t add the greatest value. However, if someone were to add a coffee shop or commercial building to the site, the commercial improvement would likely contribute more value than a home. In other words,
matching the ideal improvement to the underlying zoning likely produces the highest value.
How about a site that is zoned multi-family but there is a small, older single-family home on it? If prices are increasing and there’s high demand for more living units would a single living unit or multiple living units produce the greatest increase to the property’s income production and value? Often, multiple living units would increase the property’s value the most. If so, then how does the existing single home fit the ideal improvement for the site? That is the question every appraiser must answer in a Highest and Best Use Analysis, as required by the Standards:
Standard Rule 1-3.
When necessary for credible assignment results in developing a market value opinion, an appraiser must b) develop an opinion of the highest and best use of the real estate.
In the above example the SFR is not the ideal structure because it’s mismatched with the maximum number of units allowed by zoning. While it may add something to the value, it is not the ideal building that increases the property’s value the most, however, a multi-family building would.
Therefore, the SFR building is likely economically and functionally an obsolete structure (the appraisal term is economic and functional obsolescence). Attempting to accurately ascertain value is why appraisers ask: page 308
A. What are the legal uses for the site?
B. What is physically possible for the site?
C. Is there market demand for what can be built on the site?
D. Which potential use and building would produce the highest property’s value?
Knowing the land value, as if vacant, helps determine the contributory value of an existing structure. The structure’s value will lead to determining the remaining economic life, depreciation rates, condition adjustments, as well as site adjustments between the subject and comparables. The best comparables should have the same highest and best use as the subject, which in turn produces the highest value with the fewest adjustments.
In a Highest and Best Use Analysis, the term analysis encompasses both steps: the land as if vacant (even if it isn’t) and an analysis of an existing or proposed structure on the land. If all an appraiser does is analyze the existing structure as improved, then they are only performing half of what’s required. Way back when, USPAP outlined both steps (as if vacant and as improved) and the term analysis. However, that was redundant, so they dropped the terms “as if vacant” and “improved” and replaced them with the term “analysis” since that incorporates both steps. Mark Ratterman’s book, Residential Market Analysis and Highest and Best Use, classes by the Appraisal Institute, and classes at OREPEducation.org also explain the two or three-step process.
As Improved
Many appraisers indicate that Fannie Mae “only” wants to know the highest and best “as improved” but that again is only half of the story. First off, the typical appraisal form is not USPAP compliant; appraisers must perform additional analysis and add additional information to produce a compliant
“Many appraisers indicate that Fannie Mae ‘only’ wants to know the highest and best ‘as improved’ but that again is only half of the story.”
appraisal. For years, I’ve stated that appraisers should be adding information and analysis regarding the site in addition to the check box on the front page of bank appraisal forms. This is a truncated version of what we have in our addendums:
Based on my analysis of the neighborhood, market demand, and zoning, the highest and best use of the site as if vacant is for a singlefamily residential home. The highest and best use of the existing improvements is that of a single-family home with demand for this use, by an owner occupant, being now, as indicated on the front page of the form.
(Our full version takes up half of a page or more.)
Many appraisers only know of the first part of Fannie Mae’s guideline, but the second part is very informative:
The mortgaged premises must be:
The highest and best use of the property as improved, and the use of the property must be legal or legal non-conforming use.
Now, here is the second part that many appraisers miss:
• For improvements to represent the highest and best use of a site, they must be legally permitted, financially feasible, and physically possible, and must provide more profit than any other use of the site would generate
• All of those criteria must be met if the improvements are to be considered as the highest and best use of a site.
• If the current improvements do not represent the highest and best use of the site ... it must be
indicated on the appraisal report. (B4-1.304, Site Section of the Appraisal Report)
Going back to the multi-family zoning example: If there’s a small older house on a multi-family zoned lot, does the small home provide more profit (or increase in value) than a new multifamily building would? An appraiser shouldn’t skip over this question or step when analyzing the property. The appraiser must analyze market demand and the property to determine a home’s relationship to how much it contributes to a property’s total value.
Unfortunately, if market demand or zoning changes, the existing home might not represent the most profitable use of the site. This is where some lenders start to loath a thorough analysis. It doesn’t matter if a loan is being sold to FNMA or not. FNMA, Freddie Mac, FHA, VA, and FarmHome all require appraisals to comply with USPAP , so even if there’s conflicting information in the guidelines or what other appraisers try to tell you, you must follow USPAP.
When Zoning Changes
There are a few areas that are upzoning to multi-family. When zoning changes, the existing structure might not be the one that contributes the most value today. The existing house could even be a detriment due to the costs of tearing it down and carting it away. Even if the house remains, what is its contributory value?
Here’s a recent example from my area. Assume the house contributes $50,000 to the total value (Land is worth $300,000 the house contributes $50,000 for a total of $350,000). The question is, if a builder buys the
property and tears the house down (sacrificing $50,000) would building a new structure that meets the new zoning code then selling it, provide more profit to the builder than $50,000?
In my example the new multi-family building (or multiple townhouses) sold for $2,000,000. The builder’s profit was 15 percent, which is typical. That means the builder’s profit was $300,000 or $250,000 net, after tossing away the old house. Hmm, buy a house, tear it down and you can obtain a net profit of $250,000. Doesn’t take a genius, or even competent appraiser, to figure out what type of building, added to the site, produces the highest value. Even if the old house contributed $100,000 to the value, future profits far and away exceed that figure. This is the rudimentary analysis appraisers should perform before
simply checking the Highest and Best Use (H&BU) “As-Improved” box on the front of the form.
This is also why the H&BU analysis requires appraisers to look around the neighborhood and determine what is happening today and will likely happen in the future. Supply and demand are important parts of the analysis which will inform the appraiser and lender on how long the house will likely remain before it’s torn down (components of economic life and effective age).
The Highest Value
Unfortunately, there are lenders out there that don’t want a proper analysis or the highest value, they just want an appraiser who will check the box and give them the value they desire. They also look at appraisers as disposable pawns in the lending game. They
find the cheapest, the easiest to push around, and if something goes wrong, they duck and let the appraiser take the hit.
Producing the highest value usually requires knowing the best use for the land and determining which structure would increase its value the most. There are many clients out there willing to pay lucrative fees for appraisals with a proper analysis; besides, it’s something competent appraisers do every single day.
My suggestion: take several classes on Highest and Best Use. I also have a two-part webinar on WorkingRE.com that will help, called “Land Value and the Cost Approach.” Become better educated than the box checkers who may become a future target.
I’m trying to keep you safe out there. WRE
Why Join NSREA?
There are many reasons to become a member of the National Society of Real Estate Appraisers. We have the tools, resources, and support you need to succeed. The purpose of NSREA is to formulate rules of ethics and professional conduct, and to enforce these rules for the benefit of its membership, and those desirous of joining the society.
NSREA applies favorable influence on the valuation industry, advocates appraiser interests to create chances for advancement, and provides opportunities to:
• Develop relationships with other appraisers
• Stay on top of market trends
• Receive designations
• Impact business development
Ready to Make a Difference? Open the door to a rewarding career in real estate appraisal. Be part of the solution and join NSREA today!
Visit www.nsrea.org to learn more and become a member!
“The Expo is a three-day event where professionals collaborate, gain insights, and connect with leaders. Borisova met leaders in the profession, many of whom went out of their way to give her advice.”
Journey of a New Appraiser: How Katya Borisova Found Her Niche
by Isaac Peck, Publisher
W
hile some appraisers express optimism about the field and its future, others take a more cautious or skeptical view—sometimes even discouraging newcomers from pursuing a career in appraising altogether.
But despite the skepticism, new candidates continue to enter the field. Some new appraisers just finished college and are looking forward to starting full and comprehensive careers. Others see appraising as a landing point for a career change.
In 2020, Katya Borisova became one of those career-jumper appraisers.
Borisova, who lives in Scottsdale, Arizona, lost a corporate job on April Fools’ Day in 2020, just as COVID19 was beginning to take hold and the job market was about to become extremely unpredictable.
A single mother with business transformation and operations experience, Borisova was uncertain about her next steps. When a former co-worker suggested she ought to explore appraising, Borisova, who already owned a couple of investment properties, was intrigued. Part of the attraction was the control over her future offered by a career in appraising. Another shining point was the chance to build something of her own. An important factor was that the job would not be that much of a re-invention. Borisova already had a four-year degree in Building and Architecture from her country of birth Bulgaria, a background as a strategist, her business connections, and her knowledge of the property market all had the potential to make the transition less scary than it otherwise would have been.
So, she took the plunge, and five years later, Katya Borisova is a leading appraiser in Arizona, and a Board Member of the Coalition of Arizona Appraisers (CoAA). Working RE recently talked to Borisova about what went into that transition—and the person she became when she completed it.
Strategic Approach, Slow Start
Armed with a list of potential mentors, Borisova took a strategic approach to her entry into the appraiser field. Instead of starting at the top of the list, she began calling people from the bottom. She had found a supervisor within the week. “I started working for them as a staff appraiser,” Borisova recalls, adding that almost immediately she also began training classes.
By November of 2021 she was certified, but by the following Spring, “the market started doing crazy things,” she says. Interest rates went up. Borrowing became more expensive, reducing demand for homes.
Borisova was having a hard time getting banks and direct clients to add her to the “list” of appraisers called in her area. “I would go and sign up, they would not send me work, or would say ‘we’re not adding new appraisers, or say I didn’t have enough experience—they needed me to have three years of experience after certification,” she says.
The only option to find consistent work was with appraisal management companies (AMCs). There, Borisova found steady appraisal work but had to accept the AMCs’ low fee cut. “As long as you accept their fees, they’ll keep you,” she
recalls. To make ends meet, she worked as a waitress. “Never in my life did I think it was going to be like this,” she says. “This was going to be my cash cow, so I could build my own real estate portfolio.” But that wasn’t how it was working out.
Networking Into Success
Borisova wasn’t ready to give up yet. “I joined the Coalition of Arizona Appraisers,” she says, referring to a nonprofit organization that promotes and sustains the appraisal profession in the state, focusing on legislative advocacy, regulatory compliance, and public awareness of the importance of quality appraisals. Everywhere she went, Borisova “asked questions,” and worked on developing marketing for attorneys and other specialized groups.
Around that time, something happened that was a game-changer: Borisova discovered the Valuation Expo. At the time, things were at an all-time low for her business efforts. “I saw a post that was about the Valuation Expo. I was not making any money. I was trying to sign up with clients.” She received a 50 percent-off discount to attend and immediately jumped into networking at full speed.
Launched in 2003, today Valuation Expo is run by Appraiser eLearning and has become a leading national appraisal conference, but with a reputation for facilitating education and networking for new and younger appraisers, as well as women getting into the profession. The Expo is a three-day event where professionals collaborate, gain insights, and connect with leaders. Borisova met leaders in the profession, many of whom went out of their way to give her advice. She also connected to groups like the Appraisal Foundation Women’s Forum, as well as getting to know various lenders.
Soon after attending the Valuation Expo, and quite unexpectedly for her, a local Native American bank contacted Borisova with a request she hadn’t
heard before: they needed a mobile home appraised on Native land near Scottsdale. “I don’t know why, but they wanted me to do it,” said Borisova, who relied on her new Women’s Forum contacts to help her find the resources she needed to learn to do the appraisal. “If it wasn’t for [the Women’s Forum], I’m not sure what I would have done,” Borisova exclaims.
Expert appraiser Dave Towne would end up spending hours training Borisova on the ins and outs of Native American land and properties. Where others had simply warned her that “this is complicated,” Towne showed her the ropes. She received help from another experienced appraiser on manufactured homes. “Between Dave, the bank and my skills, I figured it out and I did it,” she recalls. The appraisal went well. More calls followed.
Borisova started getting to know others in the Native American real estate community. “I didn’t know anyone. I started going to National Association of Appraisers (NAA) conferences like ACTS and the Appraisal Summit. I told other appraisers, women that I met on Facebook, how I met clients, got more work, and encouraged others to go,” she says. Because Borisova believed in what she was doing, she wasn’t frightened of bringing other new appraisers into the landscape. Borisova’s expertise in modular and other non-traditional homes also caught the attention of PadSplit, the hugely successful co-living marketplace providing co-housing communities to working class residents.
Experiences like this taught Borisova what she needed to know to be a specialist, to carve out her appraiser identity and make her work necessary. But it also convinced her that the profession needed more helping hands, more opportunities and a more invitational approach to bringing people into the profession.
At the same time, after spending years trapped in low-fee arrangements
with AMCs, Borisova realized she couldn’t work with them anymore. “I realized that it’s just not paying enough. I don’t want to do this work for that little fee,” she recalls. It was a hard choice because in other ways, those were good work relationships. “I was very sorry; I just wanted to work for better fees. I don’t have to work for low fees. For me, my time matters, and I want to be paid appropriately.” She says the AMC manager told her they understood where she was coming from.
Breaking away from AMCs meant that she knew that she would need to step up her marketing. “I don’t like marketing. That’s not my forte. So, I signed up with a marketing company, which kept my website further on top,” Borisova reports.
Listening to her now, one sees a very different, much brighter world than the chaotic disappointments the novice appraiser had encountered only a few years earlier. “I almost have too much work now,” Borisova says. “I connected with some people, because of PadSplit, and made connections with big investors here. I’m the only appraiser who really understands and knows what these homes are about. I know what the lenders are looking for. I became the expert,” Borisova explains. By specializing in these unique properties, Borisova has created niche demand. “Whenever they have lenders that are doing these types of properties, they call me. I do the appraisals. Because other appraisers come and say this is a ‘Boarding Home.’ A lot of appraisers would be freaking out,” she recounts. But not Katya Borisova.
Advice for Success
One consistent impediment to growing as an appraiser is the barrage of naysaying promulgated by self-appointed gatekeepers of the profession. “I hate it when people say, ‘you don’t have the expertise, you shouldn’t be doing that.’ How am page 348
I going to learn if I don’t ever try to expand the work I’m doing?” Borisova exclaims. “At the end of the day, you’re just appraising a property. Find a strategy. I became the expert in that.”
Reflecting on how she gained her expertise yields a series of action-oriented points of advice: First, appraisers should build a network. “You need a network of people and mentors you can rely on,” says Borisova. To build that network, she recommends going to conferences and doing whatever it takes to go and meet people. “There is no other way. You need people you can call for help. There were many times that I didn’t know what I was doing and I needed help,” Borisova reports. “But if you don’t know what you’re doing and you’re afraid to take on complex assignments, and you decline those assignments …,” she says, then you will not be successful. “Join local organizations,” she adds, pointing out that she joined the Board of Directors of CoAA. “That creates credibility for clients. I tell them I’m on the Board for CoAA. It matters, to some extent. People should be able to find you.”
Building networks also takes creativity. Appraisers should network not only with appraiser groups, but also with other business groups. “I’m successful because I look outside of the box. I’m an investor. Some people join BNI [Business Network International]. I know an appraiser that did that and is doing very well. I know some that go to attorney gatherings. Build connections that way,” Borisova says.
Second, develop a reputation. Some of this will come from, and complement, building an online business presence. “One thing that helped me the most was my Google Business Page,” Borisova reports. “That was one of the things that really paid off. I got business because of that. People find me because they’re looking for an appraiser in Scottsdale.”
Building a reputation also involves asking for reviews. “Anytime I do a private appraisal, I always send the report, and in my email, I include a request for them to leave me a review on my Google
Page. It doesn’t work with everyone. But it built up my reviews and created a bit of traction,” she says.
Third, Borisova recommends that appraisers constantly keep learning new things. “I felt like I learned whatever I could learn from my initial supervisor. There’s a lot of knowledge in the [appraisal] business. Talk to people, you can figure it out. You can figure it out if you keep going,” she advises.
Finally, Borisova suggests that appraisers use a service like Thumbtack, an online directory that provides a platform for users to search, hire, and give ratings for local service providers, from lawyers to IT professionals, and includes appraisers. “If people are looking for an appraiser in the area, it will pop-up a couple of people. They charge for leads. But it works for me, I get a few orders. I set my own prices, this is my price, take it or leave it. Those types of services are good: things where people can find you and check your ratings and reviews. It creates a lot more ability for people to find me,” she says.
Not Uniformly Bright
The picture Katya Borisova paints of reinvention and thriving in the appraisal profession isn’t uniformly bright. Her success feels more like a result of her own optimism and resilience (stubbornness) than the generosity of the profession. “When you are new, you need expertise in your market,” Borisova says, which is a little like saying that even if you’re new, you can’t be completely new. Experienced appraisers will help, she reports, but they aren’t necessarily going to share their business, because they see clientele as a scarce resource.
For her part, Borisova is willing to help new appraisers or people testing the waters of the profession. “I don’t have a lot of people reach out to me,” she says, “but I have folks ask about how they can become an appraiser. I spend time with these people. I give them good, bad, and ugly. I am happy
to pay it forward, I’m happy to do it.”
Borisova pointed out that there are many appraisers today not working at capacity. She reports that her own experience, working several jobs to sustain herself while getting educated and developing a niche in her field, suggests that something more is needed than just going to conferences and saying we need more appraisers.
A paid mentorship program, she feels, would be extremely helpful. “We should have a sponsored mentorship program. It can be modeled after the supervisor program where supervisors are paid. Mentors should be paid to help newer appraisers,” Borisova explains, further detailing that such a program could perhaps last six months.
Borisova further suggests increased dialogue with appraisers to assess their needs. “I worked in business transformation. I was an internal consultant to a company, and I loved solving problems. If you want something to change, how about we ask the community? If there is something we should be focusing on and what we can do,” she says.
“I know a lot of appraisers who are like, ‘I am desperate. I don’t know what to do,’” Borisova adds.
Katya Borisova’s story shows both the challenges and possibilities found in the appraiser profession. While it is true that experience and drive are key factors for success, newcomers also need real, material support to succeed. Borisova’s suggestion of a structured mentorship program is an example of the kind of initiative that can improve training, build collaborative networks, and increase accessibility into the profession. Borisova’s story, and her breakthroughs suggest that the field can evolve in ways that benefit both new and experienced appraisers. It also demonstrates that building a specialization and carving out a niche (or two), is a great path forward for appraisers who are looking to succeed in the years ahead. WRE
“These questions will become the basis for the state’s investigation into any complaint filed against you. Therefore, you must answer those questions completely, fully, and truthfully.”
USPAP and the State Board
by Timothy Andersen, The Appraiser’s Advocate
When you think of USPAP and the state board, chills run up and down your spine, right? In any given year, the typical real estate appraiser has less than a five percent chance of getting that letter from a state appraisal board. But what happens when that letter thuds on your desk? It is not a time to panic, but it is a time to pay attention. Close attention. Life will go on. You will still be able to appraise real estate so you can make a living. But you will need help. (Remember, you can reach me by email at tim@theappraisersadvocate.com to help you when that letter does arrive.)
So, what is going to happen when USPAP and the state board become foremost in your professional life? It is likely the state board will send you a questionnaire to complete and return to the investigator. These questions will become the basis for the state’s investigation into any complaint filed against you. Therefore, you must answer those questions completely, fully, and truthfully. But, in the same vein, you must not give the state the rope to hang you with. For example, one question might be, “Were you compensated for the assignment?” Assuming you did not work for free, the entirety of your answer would be, “yes”. No more, no less. The state has no reason, frankly, to know your professional fee for that job. But one more thing:
Timothy C. Andersen, MAI, MSc, USPAP instructor and CEO of The Appraiser’s Advocate, is the instructor of “How to Raise Appraisal Quality and Minimize Risk” (7 Hours CE) at OREPEducation.org (OREP Members enjoy the course at no cost). Andersen has been in real estate and consulting since 1975 and is an AQB-certified USPAP instructor, USPAP consultant, author, instructor and expert witness. Andersen can be reached at tim@theappraisersadvocate.com.
Before we get into the questions, if you do get that letter from the state, you need to act now and not ignore it! You’ll need counsel from your E&O people, an attorney, and a USPAP expert. To fight the state appraisal board is not a job you do alone, so don’t try!
Now, let us get into some questions. Your state will want to know if you received an engagement letter and if that engagement letter is in the workfile. Remember, the engagement letter is an employment contract between you and the client. Examining this letter gives the state’s investigator the opportunity to determine if you complied with the conditions and stipulations of your contract. True, USPAP mentions nothing of contracts or engagement letters. However, if you agree to conditions and stipulations, but then do not comply with them, that is misleading the client. Typically, state appraisal boards do not look kindly at this.
Here is another question state investigators commonly ask: “did you complete and deliver the completed appraisal report as agreed in the engagement letter?” Again, this is a straightforward question with a straightforward answer, “yes” or “no.” And if the answer is no, the state will want to know why. Maybe there was a good reason such as a natural disaster or a death in the family. But to plead, “Well, I just got behind!” reflects poorly on you because it is unprofessional and weak. And it does the client, and all the other parties to the transaction needing the appraisal, no favors either. That reflects poorly not only on you, but on all appraisers, as well.
Next is a long question concerning the sales comparison approach. “Describe your process used for your sales comparison approach in this assignment. Please provide specifics. Explain in detail your selection process and search parameters. Indicate your data sources and the dates of your searches. Show from your workfile the location of all this information.” To answer this one is going to be a challenge, right? The state does not merely want copies of your MLS printouts. Rather, the state wants to understand the intellectual, practical, and ethical processes behind your choice of sales comps. In addition, the state wants to understand how and why you chose comps in neighborhood-X, but not in neighborhood-Z. In all candor, a lot of this goes to ferreting out bias. Bias of any type is not only a violation of state appraisal statute, but also a major violation of USPAP’s Ethics Rule.
In looking at your search parameters, the state wants to understand if you chose to search for comps using price as a criterion. Why? Simply because to use price as a comparable search criterion is one evidence of bias. Specifically, selection and confirmation biases. If you do not know what these two biases are, please look them up so you can avoid them in the future. In addition to how you chose your comps, the state wants to understand how much time you spent searching for your comparable sales. There is no threshold of what a proper amount of search time is, but if you indicate that searching for, and then finding them, was a task that took five minutes to complete, the investigator is going to want to know why it was so short. Frankly, though, there may be an excellent explanation. Please explain that clearly to the investigator.
It is typical for appraisers to skip the analytics of the cost approach, despite what USPAP’s SR1-4(b) advises.
“It is likely the state will ask for names. Those names could include the AMC’s contact name and information, the seller’s and/or buyer’s names, the real estate broker’s names, and the name of the escrow agent.”
As a result, the state will make it a point to ask specific questions about your use of this analytic. Let me quote from one state’s questionnaire, “Please provide specifics with regard to site value, cost of improvements, and depreciation …” This question is in keeping with USPAP’s SR1-4(b)(iii), which states, “The appraiser must analyze such comparable data as are available to estimate the difference between the cost new and the present worth of the improvements…” And that difference between the cost of new and the present worth of the improvements is accrued depreciation. So, if you choose not to use the analytics of the cost approach, that is your call. But the state may want a deeper explanation of the exclusion of the cost approach other than the boilerplate “…the cost approach is omitted since the market does not use the cost approach…,” which is circular reasoning, don’t you think?
It is likely the state will ask for names. Those names could include the AMC’s contact name and information, the seller’s and/or buyer’s names, the real estate broker’s names, and the name of the escrow agent. You rightly ask why these are important. It is likely the state’s investigator will contact these folks to verify the scope of work you indicated in the appraisal report. It is common to declare in real estate appraisal reports that the appraiser was in contact with any, some, or all these people, if not others as well. But it is also common for such statements to be empty boilerplates. If the state’s verification of these shows they are empty boilerplates rather than the truth, you are going to have the opportunity to explain yourself. None of
these are going to be a problem if you have the answers to these questions, as well as any others the state may ask, available in the workfile. Which makes clear the importance of the workfile, does it not?
So, between now and the arrival of that letter, what can you do to prepare? First, check your workfile. It should be killer. If you need to bolster its contents, the time to do so is now, not after that letter arrives from the state. Next, check your reports. Please look at the boilerplate you use. Does that boilerplate make sense in the context of the appraisal report it is in? If not, do not use it anymore. For example, a statement such as, “the adjustments are as shown” does not mean anything, does not explain anything, and does not support your value conclusion. So, why is it in your report? Does your boilerplate reference outdated editions of USPAP or old editions of The Appraisal of Real Estate? If so, please update them. Errors such as these are unprofessional, reflect poorly on you and, by extension, on the rest of us, too.
Now, it is time to close the logic loop and bring this article to an end. Again, in any given year, your chances of a letter from your state’s appraisal board are low. But if that letter does come, you will need help, help from your E&O people, help from an attorney, and help from a USPAP instructor. And you will need a killer workfile as part of your protection. The time to assemble that killer workfile is now, not when you need it. In other words, to quote appraisal’s friend Blaine Feyen, “the time to dig your well is now, when you are not thirsty.” WRE
“Some industry insiders have questioned whether Connolly and the late Mott, both academics, are the ones paying this multimillion-dollar legal bill.”
Appraiser Vindicated: Lanham Discrimination Lawsuit Dismissed in Maryland
by Isaac Peck, Publisher
O
ne of the most widely publicized and contested lawsuits alleging appraisal discrimination has finally come to an end.
On July 17, US District of Maryland judge Stephanie Gallagher issued summary judgement in the case of Connolly & Mott v. Shane Lanham, effectively dismissing Connolly and the late Mott’s claims that appraiser Shane Lanham discriminated against them by appraising their home for less than they hoped, while simultaneously dismissing Lanham’s counterclaim against the plaintiffs for defamation.
The result is an ending to a nearly three-year legal battle that started in August 2022. Shortly after filing their lawsuit against Lanham, both Connolly and Mott were quoted at length across mainstream media outlets—CBS News, The New York Times, NBC, CNN, ABC News, and more—describing how Lanham discriminated against them and undervalued their home because they are Black.
Lanham countersued shortly after and argued that they had defamed him, falsely labeled him a racist on national news, and were responsible for severe emotional and financial damage to his life and his business. (Search “Appraiser Countersues” on WorkingRE .com .)
Here are the details on the resolution of this important case.
Significance of the Case
This case is perhaps one of the most significant appraisal discrimination lawsuits to have been decided to date. There
have been other widely publicized lawsuits against appraisers—many of which have been quietly settled. This is the second case where an appraiser has gotten a discrimination lawsuit effectively dismissed, with the first being an appraiser (an OREP Member) who recently triumphed in an Ohio lawsuit alleging discrimination (see pg. 12).
This case is particularly significant for two key reasons.
First, it is likely a material test case for “appraisal discrimination” litigationfunding. Connolly and the late Mott were represented by Relman Colfax, a leading fair housing law firm that recently billed over $500,000 to The Appraisal Foundation (TAF) to advise on USPAP revisions. According to court records from months ago, Relman Colfax has billed 5,411 hours to the case at an average hourly rate of $583, with total expenditure reaching $3.15 million (The final bill is expected to exceed this amount).
Some industry insiders have questioned whether Connolly and the late Mott, both academics, are the ones paying this multi-million-dollar legal bill. This questioning occurs against a backdrop of litigation where many (nearly all) of the bias lawsuits filed against appraisers have been joined or co-filed by a local fair housing organization. The plaintiffs in a Marin County, California lawsuit, another suit that drew headlines across national media outlets, were backed by the Fair Housing Advocates of Northern California, for example.
The fact that Relman Colfax billed over $3 million on this case alone means that it is likely representing one of the most expensive cases that has been brought against an appraiser to date, at least for plaintiff-side accounting. This, combined with the fact that many of these cases are backed by non-profit fair housing organizations, suggests that this case may set an example and discourage other non-profits or private litigation-funders as they contemplate financially backing future cases suing an appraiser for racial discrimination.
Second, as one of the most widely publicized discrimination lawsuits and one of the last ongoing lawsuits against an appraiser, this case is a material victory for appraisers nationally. It is also the second example in 2025 of an appraiser prevailing in Court against claims of appraisal discrimination and bias. The lender in this case, loanDepot, chose to settle with Connolly and Mott in early 2024, but Lanham chose to stay the course and refused to settle.
Decision Specifics
In granting summary judgement for Lanham in dismissal of Connolly and the late Mott’s (plaintiffs) discrimination claims, the Court explains that all the plaintiffs’ claims are predicated on a finding that Lanham “discriminated against them on the basis of their race.”
The Court explains the current legal standard that exists for discrimination claims in the United States. First, if the plaintiffs do not have direct evidence of discrimination, they must be satisfied with what is called the McDonnell-Douglas test (from McDonnell-Douglas Corp. v. Green), which involves the following sequence:
1. Plaintiffs must begin by making out a “prima facie case of discrimination.”
2. The burden then shifts to the defendant (Lanham in this case) who must “establish that there was
a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for the ... action.”
3. The burden then shifts back to the plaintiff, who must “prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the legitimate reasons offered by the [defendant] were not its true reasons, but were a pretext for discrimination.”
In this case, plaintiffs argued that the appraisal value of $472,000 that Lanham delivered discriminated against them as Black homeowners because it “undervalued” their home compared to other white homeowners in the neighborhood (Item 1). Lanham responded that his opinion of value was fair and reasonable, and based on appropriate appraisal standards and analysis, not discrimination. (Item 2: the legitimate non-discriminatory reason).
The crux of the Court’s decision rests on the plaintiffs’ inability to offer evidence or prove Item 3, that Lanham’s true intent was to discriminate against them with his appraised value.
Plaintiffs relied heavily on the expert witness testimony of Junia Howell, a Sociology professor at the University of Illinois Chicago. Howell’s work has been cited by the Brookings Institute, and she has been central to the creation of the theoretical framework that has been used to paint appraisers as reinforcers of a biased and discriminatory real estate market. Howell has written that appraisers “do not merely reflect the market—they actively create it” and her academic work openly calls on policymakers to consider how we can “collectively offer reparations” for the explicitly racist housing policies of the past—although she stops short of arguing appraisers themselves should offer reparations.
One problem that the plaintiffs ran into is that in her deposition, Howell testified that she is not an appraiser, and she was “not trying to suggest that there are specific alternatives” to Lanham’s
appraisal methodologies. This proved to be a fatal blow for the plaintiffs as the Court found that Howell was “unqualified to assess whether [Lanham] complied with those requirements, norms, and standards” and threw out all arguments Howell made that Lanham had deviated from USPAP or other professional appraisal standards.
Howell had attempted to conduct a systematic analysis of hundreds of Lanham’s appraisals and demonstrate a pattern of discrimination, but the Court concluded that the distinctions Howell identified among Lanham’s appraisals are “no more than nitpicking. Without the foundation in appraisals necessary to explain the significance of these distinctions, this Court has no way to place them in context. None of the ‘departures’ Dr. Howell highlighted is sufficient to raise an inference of discrimination on its own, nor do they collectively raise such an inference.”
Ultimately, the Court grants that Howell successfully demonstrated that Lanham “had a pattern of valuing homes in 100 percent white neighborhoods at higher values than comparable homes in 100 percent non-white neighborhoods,” but adds that this fact alone is not “enough to create a genuine issue of material fact” that Lanham was not merely reporting on the market. “Nor do they holistically raise a genuine issue as to whether the real reason for the appraisal result was discrimination,” the Court writes.
Accordingly, the Court granted Lanham’s motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ discrimination claims.
Defamation Dismissed
The Court also considered Lanham’s defamation and false light invasion of privacy claims. The Court concluded that Connolly and the late Mott were shielded under fair reporting privilege, where parties to a lawsuit are entitled
to speak publicly about the claims in their lawsuit.
“Although Plaintiffs’ initial impressions have not been proven true, there is no evidence that Plaintiffs intentionally made false or misleading statements or pursued this lawsuit with the purpose of defaming [Lanham],” the Court writes.
In other words, because Lanham could not show that they filed their lawsuit in bad faith, they were entitled to fair reporting privilege and Lanham’s counterclaims were dismissed.
Lanham Speaks Out
Working RE reached out to appraiser Shane Lanham to hear about his experience and his perspective on the resolution of the trial.
“I have mixed emotions about it. I’m happy and relieved that this whole ordeal is over. I felt confident in the arguments we presented in the case, and we were prepared to go to trial, so having this resolved at the summary judgement stage means my family and I were
Sidebar Update
On September 2nd, 2025, Connolly and the late-Mott filed a new lawsuit against Lanham in the amount of $13,765.85 to cover a portion of the cost of their legal fees incurred defending against his defamation countersuit against them. This includes, Fees of the Clerk ($75), Fees for printed or electronically recorded transcripts necessarily obtained for use in the case ($13,590.85), Docket fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1923 ($20.00), and Fees for witnesses ($80). Connolly and the late-Mott are requesting that the judge make Lanham pay their fees since his defamation case was dismissed. This is a developing story, be sure to subscribe to Working RE’s e-newsletter at WorkingRE.com to stay up to date on the latest news and information in the appraisal profession.
able to avoid spending additional money. That’s a win. It’s a little disappointing that our defamation claims were also dismissed as I would’ve liked to see those through, but it is what it is,” says Lanham.
The emotional rollercoaster of the case definitely took its toll. “It has been stressful for me and my family. There has been some respite and some times when it felt like things had settled down between all the legal filings, but there were also very stressful periods. At times, it created a ripple effect for my friends and my family, because then they had to worry about it too. It wasn’t pleasant,” Lanham reports.
Financial Costs
In terms of the financial costs of the case and how it has affected his business, Lanham says it is hard to quantify. “It’s definitely put a financial strain on me and my family. I lost clients and lost business. Some clients openly told me that they weren’t going to work with me because of these accusations, and others just told me that the market had slowed down—only for me to find out later that I had been placed on a blacklist. As part of our defamation case, we had an economist project out what the total cost would be for me, and it was in the hundreds of thousands. The loss of business forced me to liquidate about $50,000 in assets to keep bills paid and live life, and I had to borrow over $50,000 from my parents for legal bills. That’s a lot of money to us. I don’t know what the future holds or how this will affect me moving forward, but I hope and plan to rebuild my business and finances,” Lanham says.
Ultimately, Lanham says he feels exonerated of the claims against him. “I do feel vindicated. In my mind, I won that my appraisal was not discriminatory. The judge ruled that there was no evidence of discrimination, and their claims were dismissed,” Lanham says.
In terms of the costs of defending his case, Lanham had an errors and omissions (E&O) policy that provided $100,000 of coverage for discrimination claims. Throughout the course of his case, the full $100,000 was spent and Lanham was left without further support from his insurance carrier. This is what led Lanham to create a GoFundMe campaign and solicit support from the appraiser profession and his friends and family to help raise funds for his defense.
Today, Lanham says he is very cognizant of the need for insurance to include ample discrimination claim coverage. “I actually went back to one of my old insurance agents and I told them that $100,000 isn’t going to cut it. I really think appraisers are willing to pay a higher insurance premium to have more coverage for these claims. It’s worth it. I think having $250,000 in coverage would allow appraisers to actually get through a trial and defend themselves,” Lanham says. (OREP’s primary E&O policy includes $200,000 of Discrimination Coverage at no additional cost, with up to $500,000 available for a small additional premium—Visit OREP.org today.)
Message of Thanks
Lanham shared that he felt a great deal of support from his fellow appraisers throughout the ordeal. “I have a lot of appreciation and gratitude for the many appraisers who supported me and donated to my GoFundMe campaign. A lot of folks reached out too—even if the support wasn’t financial, their words of encouragement were helpful as well. Hopefully no other appraiser will have to go through what I’ve been through, but if another appraiser needs help, I’m committed to doing my best to support them,” Lanham says. Ultimately, Lanham raised $65,000 via his GoFundMe campaign. On his final post, Lanham reiterated his gratitude for his supporters. Stay safe out there! WRE
