I'm not understanding the motivation of an appraiser to undervalue a home on a black borrower's refinance application. Even if the appraiser is a raging racist. Who benefits from this? The owner is already in the house. Denying the refi doesn't really accomplish anything positive for anyone that I can see. Green is everyone's favorite color, and the refinance company earns origination fees when the deal is done. So does the appraiser. The current mortgage holder would presumably be delighted to see a refi, because he gets paid off in full. The only think I can imagine is that the refi company will be holding the new note and mortgage doesn't want the risk of default, and thinks that a black homeowner in need of a refi will struggle to pay even the lower note. But is this because the refi company is racist? Or is it because he studies and profiles repayment trends and default rates of borrowers? I can't convince myself that racism is the most likely motivation to sabotage a refi application by low balling the appraisal. Moreover, the appraiser is independent of the refi company. So what does the refi company do? Call the appraiser and whisper that he wants the appraisals for black owners to come in low, thereby undermining the loan application? This isn't making any sense. On edit, here is the story, or "a" news story, on the "anecdote." https://www.washingtonpost.com/real...fbfb50-543c-11eb-a817-e5e7f8a406d6_story.html I would like to hear both appraisers' sides of this story. The story reads as though the first appraiser zoned the house incorrectly, assuming that since the owners were black, that they lived in section X of the city, and therefore used the wrong comparables. And In this story, at least, there is only one "low" appraisal, not two.
Thank you for your contribution, councilor... it should be encouraging and informative to people who don't think that LAW, per se, is enough to correct what are perceived to be law-breaking behaviors in our country. Government, and all its "programs" will never change people, but laws can FORCE people to stop mistreating other people! One small but relevant example: when was the last time that a Black person was refused to be able to sit down and order a meal in an American restaurant...? This was quite common all the way up through the Civil Rights Act of 1964, but no restaurant owner in the U. S. would DARE to try to pull something like that today!
I can't answer to any of that, but I can tell you that Realtors underpitch because it will bring them a very quick and certain sale. They might lose a few dollars off their commission, but it's worth to have that certain quick sale. If a property sits for months unsold, they've lost that difference anyway .. and the vendor could ultimately walk after all the months of effort on the part of the Realtor.
I've attended churches where I was the only white guy there and those churches were great...... so I believe that the media want to make things look far worse than they really are.
Thank you... There's nothing like a few narcissistic loud mouths with bull horns to bring out the camera crews. I moved to an all Black neighborhood around 1980 and didn't have a single hostile encounter with any of my neighbors for the 20 years I was there over racial issues or anything else. Everyone seemed too busy with work, chores and raising their children etc. It was the only area where I could find a structurally sound, historic home that I could afford and people seemed to take pride in their humble, old homes. Even though few of neighbors owned their homes, they seemed to take pride in their sidewalks, front porches and small yards. Upstairs in my 2 story home there was an elderly Black lady who had lived in the upstairs apartment for 30 years on a 30 Day Lease with the previous owner. I assured her that I would not raise the rent or ever compel her to move. After all, she had been living there longer than I. Since gentrification was going on all around the general area, this was quite a relief to her and at the same time, I knew how I would feel if someone told my mother that she had 30 days to move from her home. The only time I had anything stolen was by a couple of White workers I hired for help doing renovation work and I'm pretty sure that the main reason for my otherwise good fortune was because of the way I treated Mrs B. I can only conclude that the reason that today's selectively offended and chronically outraged individuals have so much time to tour the country telling us how outraged and offended they are is that they have too much time and money but nothing better to do.
The left make everything racist. By talking about it 24/7 they are actually big contributors to keeping racism alive.
Since the USA is rascist, it would never legitimately elect a black man to the presidency. It follows that Barack Obama stole the election. That's funny, but I don't know why exactly. I am sure it will offend someone.
Doesn't work that way in my area. You cannot pick your appraiser and if you have one done outside their stable of people, they won't accept it. The banks bring in appraisers from outside the jurisdiction where the property is situate (i.e. another city or county). They started doing this after the recession because too many people were wink winking the appraisals higher than they should have been which was part of so many people ending up under water.
Who is "you"? The borrower? Of course not. Doesn't work what way in your area? I didn't say anything about "picking your own appraiser."
What? I don't know who the F you think you are arguing with, but I didn't suggest "hiring a second appraiser" in the post you quoted yesterday at 8:20 pm., nor do I suggest it now.
Your story involves a woman who had two appraisals done. The second one was done by someone she hired and it came in much higher. There is a reason banks stopped accepting these independent appraisals.
It's not "my story." You are clearly confused and might benefit from reading the thread from the beginning, and not confusing me with other posters.
Realator.com is jumping into the equity pool. One area where Doctorow said real estate companies could “shine a light on inequity and promote fairness” was in “rethinking” how they characterized neighborhoods: Rethinking how we characterize neighborhoods. Historically, our industry has rated neighborhoods using metrics that unfairly penalize communities of color. We can all do a better job explaining the facts in a way that does not unfairly penalize neighborhoods, towns and cities. Redfin, Realtor-dot-com To Stop Including Crime Stats on Listings Due to Possible ‘Racial Bias’ Concerns (legalinsurrection.com) So they are no longer providing crime statistics on neighborhoods where houses are located. Doing so disproportionally impacts black home sellers, so of course its considered systemic racism to do so.
Just spitballing here, but, a low appraisal would make the home easier to sell. The main takeaway is the actual thought into what a disparity means rather than the opportunistic race hustling that we see the divisive racist baiters and gentry white saviors habitually engage in.
The risk can be adjusted via mortgage rates. During the big mortgage bust leading into Obama’s term, rules were so relaxed by Fanny and Freddy, dad’s overtime, mom’s tips and juniors paper route were included in income to get marginal borrowers qualified. The result was they lost their homes when their income dipped because no one said ‘NO”. The point of financing is not social justice but to loan with interest and get your money back on time as promised.
You have it backwards, it is you who is hurling the scandalous charge, it is you who has the burden of proof. It is you who is evading that responsibility because you don't have it. For example: A white administrator is claiming she was fired based on her race, and based on her complaints that her department chair said “I despise white people” and various other things. You're dismissive our laws that allow any of us who believe we have been the victims of racial discrimination to seek redress, because the existence of those laws undercuts your deliberate and offensive evidence free slander directed at us based on our skin color and nationality. Faure v. Ohio State Univ. or, what in the living hell is infecting our Universities? So, a solid work career and work history, long time employee. They selected a bitter racist hater as chair. So she knows enough about right and wrong to deny her statements, which interestingly, is exactly what the racist that attacked her threatened, according to her account of the unwitnessed incident. So, other employees corroborate this bitter racists racial attacks on employees. No American needs to stand for such racial attacks in the workplace and an employer has a greater responsibility for the actions of a supervisor. She was provided an opportunity to make her case. The word "reverse" adds no pertinent information. The sentence is better stated: "The Plaintiff therefore has shown a prima facie case of race discrimination." If the Jury finds that this was pretextual firing to cover racism? These sob's are going to pay handsomely for their evil, and that is how it should be. You are quite dismissive of these powerful laws and constitutional provisions, yet, they have enormous power to ensure remedy. And so the suit moves forward, and I suspect that an out of court settlement is likely. It needs to be enough to cause sufficient pain so that this employer does the work necessary to ensure a workplace free from racial mistreatment.
No more "racist" than Jesse Jackson is racist. "There is nothing more painful for me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start to think about robbery and then look around and see it’s somebody white and feel relieved." The Reverend Jesse Jackson. (Kennedy 1998, 16)
Right, but If I offer you $200k for your house, and the appraisal comes back at $185k, the bank isn't going to finance 10% (or whatever their guidelines are) of 200k. So in some cases a low appraisal it makes it harder to sell.
A golden oldy! And your proof is a single anecdote right up the EEOC's alley? While I presented surveys and studies earlier in the thread, which you ignored....typical. Weak stuff.
Your studies only show disparities. They do not explain the disparities, and certainly do not conclude that "racism" or "systemic racism" explains the disparities. One of them even specifically acknowledges that they don't know what explains it. If you chart out, on a bell curve, the SAT scores, by race, of American students, the ones on the right side of the slope will be disproportionately Asian, that is, the proportion of Asian representation at the upper reaches of the pile will be higher than the proportion of Asian representation among the population. That's just reality. To some people, that's "racism," or evidence of racism. To other people, let's say the ones on the right end of the curve -- call them "smart people" -- it means that Asians are either smarter than the average bear, or they study more than the average bear, or they study harder than the average bear. What it does NOT mean is that the SAT test is biased in favor of Asians. I do realize that this is harder to understand for people who are on the left end of the bell curve than it is for people on the right end. They have my sympathies.
Those who wish to fantasize that there are NO measurable differences between the Caucasoid, Negroid, and Mongoloid races of mankind will never be convinced of anything else, no matter how comprehensive or thorough the research methods are. Nevertheless, for those who are willing to READ, there is interesting insight revealed here: https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf >> I hasten to add the clarification that, here in the United States, racial differences in intelligence should not, can not, and MUST NOT be used to discriminate for or against anyone! The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Voting Rights Act of 1965 make it indisputably mandatory that all citizens of the United States are EQUAL BEFORE THE LAW... and nothing I'm trying to add to the discussion here should be construed as an argument to the contrary!
