Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 05/01/I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaintFor clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firmThe appraiser who completed the appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Tennessee, not an employee ofStreetLinks As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignmentsInstead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transactionIn this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender Mr [redacted] (Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship withStreetLinks, and is not a named intended user of the resulting appraisalreport Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the serviceexpected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluencedopinion of the market value of the subject property from a residentialappraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Tennessee to providesuch a product The intended user of the resulting appraisal product wasonly the lenderThe borrower is requesting a full refund of the appraisalfee, indicating due to an error in the initially delivered appraisal report theclient requested a post complete revision regarding the subject propertyaddress The borrower indicates that this required revision caused himdelays and loss of money Upon order entry, the client provided themailing address for the property The appraiser wrote the appraisalreport utilizing the subject’s public record address, providing commentarywithin the report regarding the order address versus the public recordaddress StreetLinks updated the order with the public record address andthe report was delivered to the client Eight business days after the report was delivered, theclient requested a post complete revision which asked the appraiser to revisethe subject property address to the mailing address, indicating that USDA willonly accept appraisal reports written with the mailing address Thisaddress was verified by the client and StreetLinks via the United States PostalService website and the request was sent to the appraiser The appraiserprovided the revised report with the mailing address and additional commentaryregarding the reason for the address change less than hours later and thereport was delivered to the client the same day Throughout the life ofthe order, a need by date nor a rush request was made by the clientA request for a refund or restitution is not warranted atthis timeRespectfully, Patty C***Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com # [redacted] SL # [redacted] – [redacted] - October 10, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaintWhile it was determined that a refund is not warranted due to the fact that the allegedly deficient appraisal was replaced without additional cost to the borrower, we are refunding the fee as a gesture of outstanding customer service, and offer our condolences to the borrower on the loss of her husband The borrower should expect to receive a refund in 5-business days Respectfully, Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolvedRegards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.This company is only after a person's money!Regards,*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]I am very grateful that company was able to investigate and reach the same conclusion as I did. I appreciate their sincere attempt to resolve the issue. This is how business should be conducted and that is why we have an institution such as Revdex.com. I felt like I am heard. That is very important and I appreciate you very much.
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 06/06/2016 In review of your web-based workorder, it is noted that the original value reconsideration (appeal) process was reiterated to you on May 4, 2016. This communication provided the policy / procedure in writing. You then moved forward with the request by placing the order for the additional product. This communication is documented and retained within the workorder. A request for refund or restitution is not warranted. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]VP of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com #[redacted] – [redacted] – 4/14/16I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. The appraisal order has been reviewed and investigated. It has been determined that a full refund is warranted due to the appearance of unprofessional conduct of the appraiser. A refund...
of the property inspection fee balance will be processed and the borrower should expect to receive a refund in 48-72 business hours. Respectfully,Patty [redacted]VP of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Regards,[redacted]
Revdex.com #[redacted] – [redacted] – 07/18/2017 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that Assurant Valuations is a national Appraisal Management Company (AMC), not a local appraisal firm. Our primary focus...
is to link lenders with the services of state licensed appraisers located within the subject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with current industry requirements and regulations. These regulations promote appraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinion of value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction. In this particular transaction, our client and the entity that made the request for services, was the lender. Mr. [redacted] did not enter into any contractual client relationship with Assurant Valuations and is not a named the intended user of the resulting appraisal report. Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the service expected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluenced opinion of the market value of the subject property from a residential appraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Texas to provide such a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product was only the lender. Assurant Valuations provides the service of separating the lender’s loan production staff from the appraiser in order to ensure compliance with appraiser independence requirements. Mr. [redacted] is displeased with the appraiser's professionalism and comparables utilized within the appraisal report along with a property not utilized. Assurant Valuations engaged an appraiser to perform and complete a residential appraisal; the appraiser was properly licensed and qualified. Prior to completion of the appraisal report, neither the client nor appraiser advised there were service delays or complications when meeting the entry contact. The appraisal was reviewed by our Quality Control Department for completeness prior to final delivery. The appraisal met all appropriate standards. Upon receipt of the appraisal report, the lender ordered a subsequent review product as part of the appeal process. During the appeal process, the client provided an explanation for the appeal, additional comparables to consider, and ordered a review product. Upon delivery of the review product, the client submitted an additional property for the original appraiser to consider utilizing as a comparable property and the appraiser was asked to address the possible amenity discrepancies discovered by the review appraiser. The requests were addressed appropriately and delivered to the client. No further request has been made by the client. It is important to remember, since the appraisal report is prepared for the lender, it is not necessarily written in a way that will be easily understood by someone who is not skilled at reviewing appraisal reports. Since the appraiser rarely has identical homes to use for the basis of their comparison, it is often necessary to utilize sales that may have a degree of dissimilarity and then make market based adjustments to the sales prices of these properties to compensate for the differences. It is not uncommon for a borrower, who was not the appraiser’s intended user or client, to misunderstand the valid techniques and practices employed by a professional appraiser. A refund or request for restitution is not warranted at this time. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]VP, Audit & Compliance
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Your comment is absolutely false and is an outright lie. I understand that your company wants to save its $150, but this fraud and deceit will not go unnoticed or unpunished. I will take the necessary action required on my end to ensure that you're not able to scam more people in the way I have been scammed. I sincerely hope that the Revdex.com takes this under advisement when it gives out its A rating to a company that would scam its customers so blatantly.
Regards,[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
As of today, 4/6/2016, the appraisal report is still not completed. Most borrower have a 30-45 days to complete the loan process due to rate lock. Streetlink simply doesn't understand what a three week delay means to the end customer.It is ludicrous to hear Streetlinks (SL) saying the appraisal is on track when the appraisal is 3 weeks behind. SL is directly taking payment from the end customer (me). A contractual relationship is implied. I expect SL to deliver the work in a timely fashion even though there is no formal written contract. It appears SL has no quality control whatsoever. SL is putting their end customers at risk. I want to remind SL that you are ultimately responsible for the appraisal process. The appraiser you hired or have contracted with represents you. When the average appraisal turnaround time in my area is 1 week or less, and you are taking 3+ weeks, you are doing something wrong.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com #1[redacted] – [redacted] – 3/10/15 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firm. The appraiser who completed the...
appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Arizona, not an employee ofStreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction.In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Ms. [redacted](Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship withStreetLinks, and is not a named intended user of the resulting appraisalreport. Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the serviceexpected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased anduninfluenced opinion of the market value of the subject property from aresidential appraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Arizona toprovide such a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisalproduct was only the lender. The borrower indicates that the appraisal report wasflawed with errors. StreetLinks has a post complete revision and appealprocess in place in cases where the client requires the appraiser to addressany revisions or reconsideration of value. The appraiser’s client (thelender) has not utilized this process nor identified any substantial flaws orerrors within the report. The borrower’s complaint also indicates that theproperty’s wood burning fireplace does not function appropriately due to a badinstallation and the patio roof leaks during wet weather. It appears thatthe borrower has a significant misunderstanding of the scope of an appraisalinspection. We’d like to point out that the appraisal inspection is acursory assessment based upon a purely visual examination of the readily observableareas of property only. It is not a technically exhaustive inspection ofthe property as would be completed by a professional home inspector. Identifying defects to mechanicals and/or structural areas that are not readilyobservable based upon a ground level walk through of the property is not partof the appraiser’s scope of work. The appraiser simply provides anopinion of the market value of the home, based upon the assumption that thereare no significant hidden defects. A home inspection by a professional“home inspector” would be the appropriate product/service to determine thecondition of items like the wood burning fireplace and the roof. To provide further detail to the borrower, a statement bythe appraiser regarding the type of inspection that is performed can be foundon the Additional Comments page of the appraisal report. “Inspection/Condition: The routine inspection of the property and anyimprovements is for purposes of establishing the market value of the property.The property inspection is more of an observation. It is not to be regarded asa full property inspection of the type intended to reveal defects in mechanicalsystems, structural integrity, roofing, siding or any other property component.Quality ratings and definitions note the dwelling meets requirements ofapplicable building codes, however, the appraiser has not made detailedcomparisons relative to the local building codes.” The borrower has also expressed dissatisfaction with theturn time for the appraisal report. However, the appraiser cannot complete theappraisal without sufficient time to gather the information necessary to allowthe defined intended user (the lender) to understand the reportconclusions. In certain situations, which are often not predictable, thisprocess can take longer than others. It must be left up to theappraiser’s client that contractually engaged them for the assignment todetermine the acceptability of the amount of time taken to complete theappraisal report. It is our hope that this has suitably answered allinquiries you have in regards to this complaint. A request for a fullrefund and restitution is not warranted at this time. Respectfully, Patty [redacted]Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Streetlinks points out that they are a national appraisal ordering service and not a local appraisal ordering service. Our firm is set up with no less than 7 national appraisal ordering services and each one allows for a standard rebuttal process whenever the borrower disagrees with the results, notably related to the assigned appraiser making mistakes or using inappropriate comparable sales. In this case, the borrower, our client, deemed the appraisal ordered through Streetlinks to be inappropriately completed and wanted that to be addressed as every other national appraisal ordering service allows, except for Streetlinks.Additionally, we were not the lender who ordered the appraisal, we were a broker on behalf of the lender. To this day, Streetlinks has still refused to fix the errors related to this fact.With all that being said, it makes no bearing on the issue at hand. An employee of Streetlinks clearly stated the process. If the Rebuttal (SCORe Plus) resulted in an A or a B, the supplementary fee would be refunded. If it resulted in a C, they would pay for a new appraisal. When the result came back an A, no refund was forthcoming, as promised by Streetlinks, constituting fraud and deception on the part of Streetlinks. This is a matter of principle. Appropriate action will be taken with our firm, the third party lender in question, and more.
Regards,[redacted]
Revdex.com #[redacted] – [redacted] – 05/01/2015 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firm. The appraiser who...
completed the appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Tennessee, not an employee ofStreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction. In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Mr. [redacted](Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship withStreetLinks, and is not a named intended user of the resulting appraisalreport. Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the serviceexpected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluencedopinion of the market value of the subject property from a residentialappraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Tennessee to providesuch a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product wasonly the lender. The borrower is requesting a full refund of the appraisalfee, indicating due to an error in the initially delivered appraisal report theclient requested a post complete revision regarding the subject propertyaddress. The borrower indicates that this required revision caused himdelays and loss of money. Upon order entry, the client provided themailing address for the property. The appraiser wrote the appraisalreport utilizing the subject’s public record address, providing commentarywithin the report regarding the order address versus the public recordaddress. StreetLinks updated the order with the public record address andthe report was delivered to the client. Eight business days after the report was delivered, theclient requested a post complete revision which asked the appraiser to revisethe subject property address to the mailing address, indicating that USDA willonly accept appraisal reports written with the mailing address. Thisaddress was verified by the client and StreetLinks via the United States PostalService website and the request was sent to the appraiser. The appraiserprovided the revised report with the mailing address and additional commentaryregarding the reason for the address change less than 24 hours later and thereport was delivered to the client the same day. Throughout the life ofthe order, a need by date nor a rush request was made by the client. A request for a refund or restitution is not warranted atthis time. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 2/3/2015 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note thatStreetLinks Lender Solutions is a National Appraisal Management Company (AMC),not a local appraisal firm. The appraiser who...
completed the appraisal report inquestion is an independent fee appraiser located in New Hampshire, not anemployee of StreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform orcomplete appraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenderswith the services of state licensed independent fee appraisers located withinthe subject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction. In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Ms. [redacted] didnot enter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is nota named intended user of the resulting appraisal report. Our primaryresponsibility in this transaction, and the service expected by our actualclient (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluenced opinion of themarket value of the subject property from a residential appraiser in goodstanding and licensed by the State of New Hampshire to provide such aproduct. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product was onlythe lender. We would like to explain that StreetLinks provides theservice of separating the lender’s loan production staff from the appraiser inorder to ensure compliance with appraiser independence requirements. StreetLinks is a third party vendor to the lender and the appraiser is anindependent fee appraiser. In the mortgage lending industry today,quality control regulations generally stipulate that the lender must obtain anappraisal (an opinion of value) from an unbiased and uninfluenced independentappraiser in order to assist them in determining if the borrower’s collateralis sufficient to back the loan being applied for. Under federal bankingregulations, the lender is required to engage the appraiser, and therefore, thelender (not the borrower) must be the appraiser’s client. This is trueeven though many borrowers actually pay the appraiser’s fee. It iscustomary for the lender to pass this fee to the borrower as a cost of makingthe application for a loan, similar to obtaining a credit report, propertytitle searches, and the like. Additionally, due to recent changes withinthe lending community resulting from the collapse of the sub-prime lendingmarket and the subsequent damage to the economy, the lender must ensure thatthe appraiser is not being influenced by parties that have a direct interest inthe outcome of the loan transaction such as, the loan officer, processor, orany other employee or agent that receives compensation based upon thesuccessful funding of a loan. This is where companies like StreetLinkscome into the equation. We provide the service of separating the lender’sloan production staff from the appraiser in order to ensure compliance withappraiser independence requirements. Ms. [redacted] claims that the appraiser left the atticaccess door open and the attic light on. Additionally, she claims theappraiser caused damage to the subject property’s walk-out basement storm doorby not securely closing the door during the appraisal inspection. Ms.[redacted] is requesting replacement of the storm door. Ms. [redacted]’slender, StreetLinks’ Client, contacted StreetLinks on January 20, 2015 tosubmit a formal complaint, on her behalf, against the appraiser with theseallegations. StreetLinks Audit and Investigations Department investigatedthe claim by speaking with Ms. [redacted] and the appraiser and was unable tosubstantiate the claims that the appraiser was responsible for damage. We completed this investigation out of customer serviceto our client, the lender. There has not been any documented flaw inStreetLinks role or documented flaw in the report provided to the lender. The appraiser was duly qualified as licensed by his state and the report wasdelivered to Ms [redacted]’s lender. Restitution by StreetLinks is not warranted. Respectfully, [redacted]Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com #[redacted] SL # [redacted] – [redacted] – November 7, 2016 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. The appraisal order was cancelled by the client on 11/01/2016 as the borrower (complainant) withdrew the loan application. This cancellation initiated a reduction...
of the full fee, only charging for the property inspection. Upon further review, it has been determined that a full discount of the property inspection fee is warranted in this instance as a gesture of superior customer service. The fees associated with the appraisal order were invoiced to the client, therefore, the borrower should reach out to the lender for any reimbursement of funds. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted] Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com# [redacted]
SL#[redacted] – [redacted]
I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Upon review of the complaint and explanation from the complainant, it was
determined that two reports were ordered for the same property, bearing two
different addresses. ...
It appears that the
address may have been updated due to updating of 911 addresses in the subject
property area. A full refund has been
issued to the paying party and that refund should be reflected in 5-7 business
days.
BB #[redacted] – [redacted] – 9/2/2015 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firm. The appraiser who...
completed the appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Florida, not an employee ofStreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promote appraiserindependence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinion of value byparties involved in the mortgage transaction.In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Ms. [redacted] did notenter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is not anamed intended user of the resulting appraisal report. Our primaryresponsibility in this transaction, and the service expected by our actualclient (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluenced opinion of themarket value of the subject property from a residential appraiser in good standingand licensed by the State of Florida to provide such a product. The intendeduser of the resulting appraisal product was only the lender. StreetLinks engaged an appraiser to perform and completea residential appraisal; the appraiser was properly licensed and qualified. Theappraisal was reviewed by our Quality Control Department for completeness priorto final delivery. The appraisal met all appropriate standards. In this particular transaction, Ms. [redacted]’ objectionswith the appraisal report is a displeasure with the comparables utilized,non-disclosure of updates to the home, and a claim that false photos were usedwithin the appraisal. StreetLinks has a post complete revision and appealprocess in place for any revisions, clarifications, or reconsideration of valuethat may be requested by the Client. The Client utilized the appealprocess by providing five additional comparables for the appraiser toconsider. That process has been completed and the revised report wasdelivered to the Client. Ms. [redacted]’ states her desired settlement is aproper and fair appraisal report without false photos,and she would like the appraisal report to include the comparables shesubmitted to her lender. Unfortunately, the Client has not providedany further request to StreetLinks. Additionally, the client has notprovided any information regarding the use of false photos within the appraisal nor requested information regarding the property’simprovements. In the mortgage lending industry today, quality controlregulations generally stipulate that the lender must obtain an appraisal (anopinion of value) from an unbiased and uninfluenced independent appraiser inorder to assist them in determining if the borrower’s collateral is sufficientto back the loan being applied for. Under federal banking regulations,the lender is required to engage the appraiser, and therefore, the lender (notthe borrower) must be the appraiser’s client. due to recent changes withinthe lending community resulting from the collapse of the sub-prime lendingmarket and the subsequent damage to the economy, the lender must ensure thatthe appraiser is not being influenced by parties that have a direct interest inthe outcome of the loan transaction such as, the loan officer, processor, orany other employee or agent that receives compensation based upon thesuccessful funding of a loan. This is where companies like StreetLinkscome into the equation. We provide the service of separating the lender’sloan production staff from the appraiser in orders to ensure compliance withappraiser independence requirements. Respectfully,Patty [redacted]Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com #[redacted]
SL # [redacted] – [redacted] - October 10, 2014
I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. While it
was determined that a refund is not warranted due to the fact that the
allegedly deficient appraisal was replaced without additional cost...
to the
borrower, we are refunding the fee as a gesture of outstanding customer
service, and offer our condolences to the borrower on the loss of her
husband. The borrower should expect to receive a refund in 5-7 business
days.
Respectfully,
Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Regards, [redacted]
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 05/01/I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaintFor clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firmThe appraiser who completed the appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Tennessee, not an employee ofStreetLinks As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignmentsInstead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transactionIn this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender Mr [redacted] (Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship withStreetLinks, and is not a named intended user of the resulting appraisalreport Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the serviceexpected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluencedopinion of the market value of the subject property from a residentialappraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Tennessee to providesuch a product The intended user of the resulting appraisal product wasonly the lenderThe borrower is requesting a full refund of the appraisalfee, indicating due to an error in the initially delivered appraisal report theclient requested a post complete revision regarding the subject propertyaddress The borrower indicates that this required revision caused himdelays and loss of money Upon order entry, the client provided themailing address for the property The appraiser wrote the appraisalreport utilizing the subject’s public record address, providing commentarywithin the report regarding the order address versus the public recordaddress StreetLinks updated the order with the public record address andthe report was delivered to the client Eight business days after the report was delivered, theclient requested a post complete revision which asked the appraiser to revisethe subject property address to the mailing address, indicating that USDA willonly accept appraisal reports written with the mailing address Thisaddress was verified by the client and StreetLinks via the United States PostalService website and the request was sent to the appraiser The appraiserprovided the revised report with the mailing address and additional commentaryregarding the reason for the address change less than hours later and thereport was delivered to the client the same day Throughout the life ofthe order, a need by date nor a rush request was made by the clientA request for a refund or restitution is not warranted atthis timeRespectfully, Patty C***Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com # [redacted] SL # [redacted] – [redacted] - October 10, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaintWhile it was determined that a refund is not warranted due to the fact that the allegedly deficient appraisal was replaced without additional cost to the borrower, we are refunding the fee as a gesture of outstanding customer service, and offer our condolences to the borrower on the loss of her husband The borrower should expect to receive a refund in 5-business days Respectfully, Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me. I will wait until for the business to perform this action and, if it does, will consider this complaint resolvedRegards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID ***, and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.This company is only after a person's money!Regards,*** ***
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and find that this resolution would be satisfactory to me.
Regards,
[redacted]I am very grateful that company was able to investigate and reach the same conclusion as I did. I appreciate their sincere attempt to resolve the issue. This is how business should be conducted and that is why we have an institution such as Revdex.com. I felt like I am heard. That is very important and I appreciate you very much.
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 06/06/2016 In review of your web-based workorder, it is noted that the original value reconsideration (appeal) process was reiterated to you on May 4, 2016. This communication provided the policy / procedure in writing. You then moved forward with the request by placing the order for the additional product. This communication is documented and retained within the workorder. A request for refund or restitution is not warranted. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]VP of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com #[redacted] – [redacted] – 4/14/16I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. The appraisal order has been reviewed and investigated. It has been determined that a full refund is warranted due to the appearance of unprofessional conduct of the appraiser. A refund...
of the property inspection fee balance will be processed and the borrower should expect to receive a refund in 48-72 business hours. Respectfully,Patty [redacted]VP of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that this proposed action would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Regards,[redacted]
Revdex.com #[redacted] – [redacted] – 07/18/2017 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that Assurant Valuations is a national Appraisal Management Company (AMC), not a local appraisal firm. Our primary focus...
is to link lenders with the services of state licensed appraisers located within the subject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with current industry requirements and regulations. These regulations promote appraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinion of value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction. In this particular transaction, our client and the entity that made the request for services, was the lender. Mr. [redacted] did not enter into any contractual client relationship with Assurant Valuations and is not a named the intended user of the resulting appraisal report. Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the service expected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluenced opinion of the market value of the subject property from a residential appraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Texas to provide such a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product was only the lender. Assurant Valuations provides the service of separating the lender’s loan production staff from the appraiser in order to ensure compliance with appraiser independence requirements. Mr. [redacted] is displeased with the appraiser's professionalism and comparables utilized within the appraisal report along with a property not utilized. Assurant Valuations engaged an appraiser to perform and complete a residential appraisal; the appraiser was properly licensed and qualified. Prior to completion of the appraisal report, neither the client nor appraiser advised there were service delays or complications when meeting the entry contact. The appraisal was reviewed by our Quality Control Department for completeness prior to final delivery. The appraisal met all appropriate standards. Upon receipt of the appraisal report, the lender ordered a subsequent review product as part of the appeal process. During the appeal process, the client provided an explanation for the appeal, additional comparables to consider, and ordered a review product. Upon delivery of the review product, the client submitted an additional property for the original appraiser to consider utilizing as a comparable property and the appraiser was asked to address the possible amenity discrepancies discovered by the review appraiser. The requests were addressed appropriately and delivered to the client. No further request has been made by the client. It is important to remember, since the appraisal report is prepared for the lender, it is not necessarily written in a way that will be easily understood by someone who is not skilled at reviewing appraisal reports. Since the appraiser rarely has identical homes to use for the basis of their comparison, it is often necessary to utilize sales that may have a degree of dissimilarity and then make market based adjustments to the sales prices of these properties to compensate for the differences. It is not uncommon for a borrower, who was not the appraiser’s intended user or client, to misunderstand the valid techniques and practices employed by a professional appraiser. A refund or request for restitution is not warranted at this time. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]VP, Audit & Compliance
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
Your comment is absolutely false and is an outright lie. I understand that your company wants to save its $150, but this fraud and deceit will not go unnoticed or unpunished. I will take the necessary action required on my end to ensure that you're not able to scam more people in the way I have been scammed. I sincerely hope that the Revdex.com takes this under advisement when it gives out its A rating to a company that would scam its customers so blatantly.
Regards,[redacted]
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.
As of today, 4/6/2016, the appraisal report is still not completed. Most borrower have a 30-45 days to complete the loan process due to rate lock. Streetlink simply doesn't understand what a three week delay means to the end customer.It is ludicrous to hear Streetlinks (SL) saying the appraisal is on track when the appraisal is 3 weeks behind. SL is directly taking payment from the end customer (me). A contractual relationship is implied. I expect SL to deliver the work in a timely fashion even though there is no formal written contract. It appears SL has no quality control whatsoever. SL is putting their end customers at risk. I want to remind SL that you are ultimately responsible for the appraisal process. The appraiser you hired or have contracted with represents you. When the average appraisal turnaround time in my area is 1 week or less, and you are taking 3+ weeks, you are doing something wrong.
Regards,
[redacted]
Revdex.com #1[redacted] – [redacted] – 3/10/15 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firm. The appraiser who completed the...
appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Arizona, not an employee ofStreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction.In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Ms. [redacted](Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship withStreetLinks, and is not a named intended user of the resulting appraisalreport. Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the serviceexpected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased anduninfluenced opinion of the market value of the subject property from aresidential appraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Arizona toprovide such a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisalproduct was only the lender. The borrower indicates that the appraisal report wasflawed with errors. StreetLinks has a post complete revision and appealprocess in place in cases where the client requires the appraiser to addressany revisions or reconsideration of value. The appraiser’s client (thelender) has not utilized this process nor identified any substantial flaws orerrors within the report. The borrower’s complaint also indicates that theproperty’s wood burning fireplace does not function appropriately due to a badinstallation and the patio roof leaks during wet weather. It appears thatthe borrower has a significant misunderstanding of the scope of an appraisalinspection. We’d like to point out that the appraisal inspection is acursory assessment based upon a purely visual examination of the readily observableareas of property only. It is not a technically exhaustive inspection ofthe property as would be completed by a professional home inspector. Identifying defects to mechanicals and/or structural areas that are not readilyobservable based upon a ground level walk through of the property is not partof the appraiser’s scope of work. The appraiser simply provides anopinion of the market value of the home, based upon the assumption that thereare no significant hidden defects. A home inspection by a professional“home inspector” would be the appropriate product/service to determine thecondition of items like the wood burning fireplace and the roof. To provide further detail to the borrower, a statement bythe appraiser regarding the type of inspection that is performed can be foundon the Additional Comments page of the appraisal report. “Inspection/Condition: The routine inspection of the property and anyimprovements is for purposes of establishing the market value of the property.The property inspection is more of an observation. It is not to be regarded asa full property inspection of the type intended to reveal defects in mechanicalsystems, structural integrity, roofing, siding or any other property component.Quality ratings and definitions note the dwelling meets requirements ofapplicable building codes, however, the appraiser has not made detailedcomparisons relative to the local building codes.” The borrower has also expressed dissatisfaction with theturn time for the appraisal report. However, the appraiser cannot complete theappraisal without sufficient time to gather the information necessary to allowthe defined intended user (the lender) to understand the reportconclusions. In certain situations, which are often not predictable, thisprocess can take longer than others. It must be left up to theappraiser’s client that contractually engaged them for the assignment todetermine the acceptability of the amount of time taken to complete theappraisal report. It is our hope that this has suitably answered allinquiries you have in regards to this complaint. A request for a fullrefund and restitution is not warranted at this time. Respectfully, Patty [redacted]Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted], and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Streetlinks points out that they are a national appraisal ordering service and not a local appraisal ordering service. Our firm is set up with no less than 7 national appraisal ordering services and each one allows for a standard rebuttal process whenever the borrower disagrees with the results, notably related to the assigned appraiser making mistakes or using inappropriate comparable sales. In this case, the borrower, our client, deemed the appraisal ordered through Streetlinks to be inappropriately completed and wanted that to be addressed as every other national appraisal ordering service allows, except for Streetlinks.Additionally, we were not the lender who ordered the appraisal, we were a broker on behalf of the lender. To this day, Streetlinks has still refused to fix the errors related to this fact.With all that being said, it makes no bearing on the issue at hand. An employee of Streetlinks clearly stated the process. If the Rebuttal (SCORe Plus) resulted in an A or a B, the supplementary fee would be refunded. If it resulted in a C, they would pay for a new appraisal. When the result came back an A, no refund was forthcoming, as promised by Streetlinks, constituting fraud and deception on the part of Streetlinks. This is a matter of principle. Appropriate action will be taken with our firm, the third party lender in question, and more.
Regards,[redacted]
Revdex.com #[redacted] – [redacted] – 05/01/2015 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firm. The appraiser who...
completed the appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Tennessee, not an employee ofStreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction. In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Mr. [redacted](Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship withStreetLinks, and is not a named intended user of the resulting appraisalreport. Our primary responsibility in this transaction, and the serviceexpected by our actual client (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluencedopinion of the market value of the subject property from a residentialappraiser in good standing and licensed by the State of Tennessee to providesuch a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product wasonly the lender. The borrower is requesting a full refund of the appraisalfee, indicating due to an error in the initially delivered appraisal report theclient requested a post complete revision regarding the subject propertyaddress. The borrower indicates that this required revision caused himdelays and loss of money. Upon order entry, the client provided themailing address for the property. The appraiser wrote the appraisalreport utilizing the subject’s public record address, providing commentarywithin the report regarding the order address versus the public recordaddress. StreetLinks updated the order with the public record address andthe report was delivered to the client. Eight business days after the report was delivered, theclient requested a post complete revision which asked the appraiser to revisethe subject property address to the mailing address, indicating that USDA willonly accept appraisal reports written with the mailing address. Thisaddress was verified by the client and StreetLinks via the United States PostalService website and the request was sent to the appraiser. The appraiserprovided the revised report with the mailing address and additional commentaryregarding the reason for the address change less than 24 hours later and thereport was delivered to the client the same day. Throughout the life ofthe order, a need by date nor a rush request was made by the client. A request for a refund or restitution is not warranted atthis time. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 2/3/2015 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note thatStreetLinks Lender Solutions is a National Appraisal Management Company (AMC),not a local appraisal firm. The appraiser who...
completed the appraisal report inquestion is an independent fee appraiser located in New Hampshire, not anemployee of StreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform orcomplete appraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenderswith the services of state licensed independent fee appraisers located withinthe subject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promoteappraiser independence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinionof value by parties involved in the mortgage transaction. In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Ms. [redacted] didnot enter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is nota named intended user of the resulting appraisal report. Our primaryresponsibility in this transaction, and the service expected by our actualclient (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluenced opinion of themarket value of the subject property from a residential appraiser in goodstanding and licensed by the State of New Hampshire to provide such aproduct. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product was onlythe lender. We would like to explain that StreetLinks provides theservice of separating the lender’s loan production staff from the appraiser inorder to ensure compliance with appraiser independence requirements. StreetLinks is a third party vendor to the lender and the appraiser is anindependent fee appraiser. In the mortgage lending industry today,quality control regulations generally stipulate that the lender must obtain anappraisal (an opinion of value) from an unbiased and uninfluenced independentappraiser in order to assist them in determining if the borrower’s collateralis sufficient to back the loan being applied for. Under federal bankingregulations, the lender is required to engage the appraiser, and therefore, thelender (not the borrower) must be the appraiser’s client. This is trueeven though many borrowers actually pay the appraiser’s fee. It iscustomary for the lender to pass this fee to the borrower as a cost of makingthe application for a loan, similar to obtaining a credit report, propertytitle searches, and the like. Additionally, due to recent changes withinthe lending community resulting from the collapse of the sub-prime lendingmarket and the subsequent damage to the economy, the lender must ensure thatthe appraiser is not being influenced by parties that have a direct interest inthe outcome of the loan transaction such as, the loan officer, processor, orany other employee or agent that receives compensation based upon thesuccessful funding of a loan. This is where companies like StreetLinkscome into the equation. We provide the service of separating the lender’sloan production staff from the appraiser in order to ensure compliance withappraiser independence requirements. Ms. [redacted] claims that the appraiser left the atticaccess door open and the attic light on. Additionally, she claims theappraiser caused damage to the subject property’s walk-out basement storm doorby not securely closing the door during the appraisal inspection. Ms.[redacted] is requesting replacement of the storm door. Ms. [redacted]’slender, StreetLinks’ Client, contacted StreetLinks on January 20, 2015 tosubmit a formal complaint, on her behalf, against the appraiser with theseallegations. StreetLinks Audit and Investigations Department investigatedthe claim by speaking with Ms. [redacted] and the appraiser and was unable tosubstantiate the claims that the appraiser was responsible for damage. We completed this investigation out of customer serviceto our client, the lender. There has not been any documented flaw inStreetLinks role or documented flaw in the report provided to the lender. The appraiser was duly qualified as licensed by his state and the report wasdelivered to Ms [redacted]’s lender. Restitution by StreetLinks is not warranted. Respectfully, [redacted]Director of Audit and ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
Revdex.com #[redacted] SL # [redacted] – [redacted] – November 7, 2016 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. The appraisal order was cancelled by the client on 11/01/2016 as the borrower (complainant) withdrew the loan application. This cancellation initiated a reduction...
of the full fee, only charging for the property inspection. Upon further review, it has been determined that a full discount of the property inspection fee is warranted in this instance as a gesture of superior customer service. The fees associated with the appraisal order were invoiced to the client, therefore, the borrower should reach out to the lender for any reimbursement of funds. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted] Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com# [redacted]
SL#[redacted] – [redacted]
I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint.
Upon review of the complaint and explanation from the complainant, it was
determined that two reports were ordered for the same property, bearing two
different addresses. ...
It appears that the
address may have been updated due to updating of 911 addresses in the subject
property area. A full refund has been
issued to the paying party and that refund should be reflected in 5-7 business
days.
Respectfully,
Director of Audit and Compliance
BB #[redacted] – [redacted] – 9/2/2015 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to thiscomplaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinksLender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a localappraisal firm. The appraiser who...
completed the appraisal report in question isan independent fee appraiser located in Florida, not an employee ofStreetLinks. As an AMC, StreetLinks employees do not perform or completeappraisal assignments. Instead, our primary focus is to link lenders with theservices of state licensed independent fee appraisers located within thesubject property’s local market in a manner that is compliant with currentindustry requirements and regulations. These regulations promote appraiserindependence and prohibit undue influence of an appraiser’s opinion of value byparties involved in the mortgage transaction.In this particular transaction, our client, and theentity that made the request for services, was the lender. Ms. [redacted] did notenter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is not anamed intended user of the resulting appraisal report. Our primaryresponsibility in this transaction, and the service expected by our actualclient (the lender), was to obtain an unbiased and uninfluenced opinion of themarket value of the subject property from a residential appraiser in good standingand licensed by the State of Florida to provide such a product. The intendeduser of the resulting appraisal product was only the lender. StreetLinks engaged an appraiser to perform and completea residential appraisal; the appraiser was properly licensed and qualified. Theappraisal was reviewed by our Quality Control Department for completeness priorto final delivery. The appraisal met all appropriate standards. In this particular transaction, Ms. [redacted]’ objectionswith the appraisal report is a displeasure with the comparables utilized,non-disclosure of updates to the home, and a claim that false photos were usedwithin the appraisal. StreetLinks has a post complete revision and appealprocess in place for any revisions, clarifications, or reconsideration of valuethat may be requested by the Client. The Client utilized the appealprocess by providing five additional comparables for the appraiser toconsider. That process has been completed and the revised report wasdelivered to the Client. Ms. [redacted]’ states her desired settlement is aproper and fair appraisal report without false photos,and she would like the appraisal report to include the comparables shesubmitted to her lender. Unfortunately, the Client has not providedany further request to StreetLinks. Additionally, the client has notprovided any information regarding the use of false photos within the appraisal nor requested information regarding the property’simprovements. In the mortgage lending industry today, quality controlregulations generally stipulate that the lender must obtain an appraisal (anopinion of value) from an unbiased and uninfluenced independent appraiser inorder to assist them in determining if the borrower’s collateral is sufficientto back the loan being applied for. Under federal banking regulations,the lender is required to engage the appraiser, and therefore, the lender (notthe borrower) must be the appraiser’s client. due to recent changes withinthe lending community resulting from the collapse of the sub-prime lendingmarket and the subsequent damage to the economy, the lender must ensure thatthe appraiser is not being influenced by parties that have a direct interest inthe outcome of the loan transaction such as, the loan officer, processor, orany other employee or agent that receives compensation based upon thesuccessful funding of a loan. This is where companies like StreetLinkscome into the equation. We provide the service of separating the lender’sloan production staff from the appraiser in orders to ensure compliance withappraiser independence requirements. Respectfully,Patty [redacted]Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com #[redacted]
SL # [redacted] – [redacted] - October 10, 2014
I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. While it
was determined that a refund is not warranted due to the fact that the
allegedly deficient appraisal was replaced without additional cost...
to the
borrower, we are refunding the fee as a gesture of outstanding customer
service, and offer our condolences to the borrower on the loss of her
husband. The borrower should expect to receive a refund in 5-7 business
days.
Respectfully,
Director of Audit and Compliance