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 didI appreciate their sincere attempt to resolve the issueThis is how business should be conducted and that is why we have an institution such as Revdex.comI felt like I am heardThat is very important and I appreciate you very much
Revdex.com # [redacted] SL # [redacted] – [redacted] – November 7, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaintThe appraisal order was cancelled by the client on 11/01/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: 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 serviceOur firm is set up with no less than 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 salesIn 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 lenderTo 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 handAn employee of Streetlinks clearly stated the processIf the Rebuttal (SCORe Plus) resulted in an A or a B, the supplementary fee would be refundedIf it resulted in a C, they would pay for a new appraisalWhen the result came back an A, no refund was forthcoming, as promised by Streetlinks, constituting fraud and deception on the part of StreetlinksThis is a matter of principleAppropriate action will be taken with our firm, the third party lender in question, and more Regards, [redacted] ***
BB # [redacted] [redacted] – [redacted] – 9/2/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 Florida, not an employee ofStreetLinksAs 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 regulationsThese 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 lenderMs [redacted] did notenter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is not anamed intended user of the resulting appraisal reportOur 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 productThe 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 qualifiedTheappraisal was reviewed by our Quality Control Department for completeness priorto final deliveryThe appraisal met all appropriate standardsIn this particular transaction, Ms***’ objectionswith the appraisal report is a displeasure with the comparables utilized,non-disclosure of updates to the home, and a claim that 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***’ states her desired settlement is aproper and fair appraisal report without 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 photos within the appraisal nor requested information regarding the property’simprovementsIn 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 requirementsRespectfully,Patty [redacted] Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 06/06/In review of your web-based workorder, it is noted that the original value reconsideration (appeal) process was reiterated to you on May 4, 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 workorderA request for refund or restitution is not warranted Respectfully, Patty C***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 the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Your comment is absolutely 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-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 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 week or less, and you are taking 3+ weeks, you are doing something wrong Regards, [redacted] ***
Good afternoon! This complaint has been forwarded to the appropriate division. StreetLinks, LLC is an Appraisal Management Company procuring appraisal reports for residential lenders as the asset portion of a loan file. Thank you.Patty C***VP of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com ***SL Order Number/Property Address: UnknownComplainant: *** *** September 26, 2016 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. StreetLinks has been unable to locate any order or payment placed by the complainant nor the company
associated with his email address. To better understand Mr***’s concerns, we reached out to him, via telephone and email, to obtain the order information which was absent from the complaint. A response was received via email in which the complainant indicated the issue was recently resolved and the refund was processed. As the complainant also claimed that StreetLinks provided slow service, I requested the order information a second time to fully address the complaint. There has been no response from the complainant, therefore, StreetLinks considers this complaint closed. Respectfully, Patty C***Director of Audit & ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
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.
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Streetlink should be responsible for their contractorsMy mortgage broker did forward The " appealed" appraisal to meThe only thing changed was the date on 2-of the documentsThe original dates and original appraisal remained the sameWe were stunned! As far as the pics and upgrades, I'm not sure why YOUR competent appraisal contractor wouldn't do it correct the first timeA brand new kitchen and a pic of my attic is Not a matter of opinion they are factualAnd certainly would have effected the appraisal outcome! The response was very generic and vanillaAbove pic is not my attic, nor was it inspectedAdditionally we stood in a remodeled kitchen sign paperwork though he stated No upgradesAnd were Supposed to list ALL THESE IN THE APPEAL PROCESS OR THE APPRAISER SHOULD HAVE DONE COMPETENT JOB THE FORST TIME?
Revdex.com # [redacted]2481917 – [redacted] – 04/04/16 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinks Lender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a local appraisal firm. The appraiser who completed...
the appraisal report in question is an independent fee appraiser located in North Carolina, not an employee of StreetLinks. Our primary focus is to link lenders with the services of state licensed independent fee 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] (Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is not a named 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 North Carolina to provide such a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product was only the lender. In this particular transaction, the borrower is displeased with the appraisal inspection delay and order turnaround time. Due to the area’s extreme interest in residential refinance and purchases, the order was rejected multiple times due to the appraisers’ high work volume. Upon order acceptance, the appraisal inspection was scheduled within 24 hours for the appraiser’s earliest availability. Our client was privy to the processing updates and provided with an explanation for any delays. The borrower contacted our team by phone and email asking us to research further into the order for a speedier turnaround time. We advised the borrower that we could attempt to locate a new appraiser however the workload in the area is high, which could further delay the order. We directed the borrower to contact his lender to discuss further. Throughout the life of the order, the client did not provide a need by date or rush request I am pleased to advise that the status of the appraisal order is currently on track. Should any further delays take place, a detailed notification will be provided to our client immediately. A request for restitution is not warranted at this time. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]Director 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 # [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:
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:
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] – 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 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:
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]
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: 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 didI appreciate their sincere attempt to resolve the issueThis is how business should be conducted and that is why we have an institution such as Revdex.comI felt like I am heardThat is very important and I appreciate you very much
Revdex.com # [redacted] SL # [redacted] – [redacted] – November 7, I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaintThe appraisal order was cancelled by the client on 11/01/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: 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 serviceOur firm is set up with no less than 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 salesIn 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 lenderTo 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 handAn employee of Streetlinks clearly stated the processIf the Rebuttal (SCORe Plus) resulted in an A or a B, the supplementary fee would be refundedIf it resulted in a C, they would pay for a new appraisalWhen the result came back an A, no refund was forthcoming, as promised by Streetlinks, constituting fraud and deception on the part of StreetlinksThis is a matter of principleAppropriate action will be taken with our firm, the third party lender in question, and more Regards, [redacted] ***
BB # [redacted] [redacted] – [redacted] – 9/2/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 Florida, not an employee ofStreetLinksAs 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 regulationsThese 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 lenderMs [redacted] did notenter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is not anamed intended user of the resulting appraisal reportOur 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 productThe 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 qualifiedTheappraisal was reviewed by our Quality Control Department for completeness priorto final deliveryThe appraisal met all appropriate standardsIn this particular transaction, Ms***’ objectionswith the appraisal report is a displeasure with the comparables utilized,non-disclosure of updates to the home, and a claim that 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***’ states her desired settlement is aproper and fair appraisal report without 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 photos within the appraisal nor requested information regarding the property’simprovementsIn 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 requirementsRespectfully,Patty [redacted] Director of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com # [redacted] – [redacted] – 06/06/In review of your web-based workorder, it is noted that the original value reconsideration (appeal) process was reiterated to you on May 4, 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 workorderA request for refund or restitution is not warranted Respectfully, Patty C***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 the response would not resolve my complaint For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below Your comment is absolutely 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-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 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 week or less, and you are taking 3+ weeks, you are doing something wrong Regards, [redacted] ***
Good afternoon! This complaint has been forwarded to the appropriate division. StreetLinks, LLC is an Appraisal Management Company procuring appraisal reports for residential lenders as the asset portion of a loan file. Thank you.Patty C***VP of Audit and Compliance
Revdex.com ***SL Order Number/Property Address: UnknownComplainant: *** *** September 26, 2016 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. StreetLinks has been unable to locate any order or payment placed by the complainant nor the company
associated with his email address. To better understand Mr***’s concerns, we reached out to him, via telephone and email, to obtain the order information which was absent from the complaint. A response was received via email in which the complainant indicated the issue was recently resolved and the refund was processed. As the complainant also claimed that StreetLinks provided slow service, I requested the order information a second time to fully address the complaint. There has been no response from the complainant, therefore, StreetLinks considers this complaint closed. Respectfully, Patty C***Director of Audit & ComplianceStreetLinks Lender Solutions
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.
Regards,
*** ***
Revdex.com:I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID***, and have determined that the response would not resolve my complaint. For your reference, details of the offer I reviewed appear below.Streetlink should be responsible for their contractorsMy mortgage broker did forward The " appealed" appraisal to meThe only thing changed was the date on 2-of the documentsThe original dates and original appraisal remained the sameWe were stunned! As far as the pics and upgrades, I'm not sure why YOUR competent appraisal contractor wouldn't do it correct the first timeA brand new kitchen and a pic of my attic is Not a matter of opinion they are factualAnd certainly would have effected the appraisal outcome! The response was very generic and vanillaAbove pic is not my attic, nor was it inspectedAdditionally we stood in a remodeled kitchen sign paperwork though he stated No upgradesAnd were Supposed to list ALL THESE IN THE APPEAL PROCESS OR THE APPRAISER SHOULD HAVE DONE COMPETENT JOB THE FORST TIME?
Revdex.com # [redacted]2481917 – [redacted] – 04/04/16 I appreciate the opportunity to respond to this complaint. For clarification purposes, I would like to note that StreetLinks Lender Solutions is a national appraisal management company (AMC), not a local appraisal firm. The appraiser who completed...
the appraisal report in question is an independent fee appraiser located in North Carolina, not an employee of StreetLinks. Our primary focus is to link lenders with the services of state licensed independent fee 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] (Borrower) did not enter into any contractual client relationship with StreetLinks, and is not a named 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 North Carolina to provide such a product. The intended user of the resulting appraisal product was only the lender. In this particular transaction, the borrower is displeased with the appraisal inspection delay and order turnaround time. Due to the area’s extreme interest in residential refinance and purchases, the order was rejected multiple times due to the appraisers’ high work volume. Upon order acceptance, the appraisal inspection was scheduled within 24 hours for the appraiser’s earliest availability. Our client was privy to the processing updates and provided with an explanation for any delays. The borrower contacted our team by phone and email asking us to research further into the order for a speedier turnaround time. We advised the borrower that we could attempt to locate a new appraiser however the workload in the area is high, which could further delay the order. We directed the borrower to contact his lender to discuss further. Throughout the life of the order, the client did not provide a need by date or rush request I am pleased to advise that the status of the appraisal order is currently on track. Should any further delays take place, a detailed notification will be provided to our client immediately. A request for restitution is not warranted at this time. Respectfully, Patty C[redacted]Director 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 # [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:
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:
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] – 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 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:
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]
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