All posts by admin

I HAVE HIT A NEW LOW :)

September 21, 2016 – Not too many people would use the above as a headline:)  Let me explain…

About 8 years ago today in fact, the last review I did as Chief Appraiser for the fractional bank (as it was called…or Evil Empire by other banks) was an appraisal of a vacant residential lot in Detroit.  The value conclusion was $100.  It was well supported with two sales at $100 and a listing at $200 that the appraiser adjusted downward 50%.

I had spent 22 years appraising and reviewing.  Made it to Chief Appraiser of a $100 Billion bank.  And there I sat making the big bucks to review a $100 residential lot:)  And, yes, the appraiser’s fee was higher than the value conclusion.

I have used that story many times over the years.  Now, I can top it.  I just got paid to review an appraisal of what has to be kept as a confidential property (and client).  The value conclusion was $0!  Yes, I have finally hit a new low! Now, I can finally say I have appraised and/or reviewed properties ranging in value from $0 to over $2 Billion.  That is a resume builder!  It was annoying to use $100 as the bottom of that range.

Oh, and yes again, my review fee was higher than the value conclusion.  Thankfully, USPAP prohibited me from quoting a review fee that was a percentage of the value! LOL

Everyone have a great day:)

AN INDEPENDENT REVIEW OF YOUR BANK REVIEWS

August 8, 2016 – I attended the Appraisal Institute’s national conference in Charlotte, NC a few weeks ago.  One of the sessions was about compliance and a topic was called ‘Quality Assurance Reviews – Review of the Review.’

I believe I may have performed the first ever independent review of a bank’s staff reviews back in 2014.  In March, 2015, The RMA Journal published my article on the topic.  It is titled ‘What’s New In Appraisal Review’ and you can get to it on the Articles page of this web site.  (NOTE:  I call these Quality Control Audits (QCAs), but the task is the same regardless of the name.)

One of the slides at the AI session said ‘In layman’s terms, a Real Estate Assurance Review is a third party review, performed by a reviewer not tied to the institution’s review department, of an institution’s reviewer’s review of a real estate appraisal.  This type of external review allows for a variety of credibility checks for the institution, as well as for the governmental banking regulation authorities.’

One of the slides asks the questions ‘How can my institution justify the additional cost?’  In my Chief Appraiser days at two $100+ Billion institutions this question was presented more than once a year by senior management.  How can we recover the expense of the appraisal department?  How can we get borrowers to pay the internal review fee your department is charging the lending groups?

I can see all of the Chief Appraisers reading this and nodding their head and saying yep I do this ever darn year!  As I tried to explain to senior management, the appraisal department can pay for itself many times over by saving the bank a single large loan loss.  e.g. I remember one of my reviewers finding a $4 million error in an ARGUS cash flow.  That paid for the cost of my department for 4 years right there.  And I am sure my staff found many more errors that saved the bank millions of dollars.

In one of my Quality Control Audits for a regional bank, I found a single appraisal report that was approved by the reviewer, but had a $10 million error in it!  I found many other overlooked errors in the millions of dollars.  The cost of a QCA/QAR is nominal in comparison to not doing one.

It is not just about approving erroneous appraisal values.  A QCA/QAR is also about seeing if your internal policies and procedures are being followed.  If they aren’t, you will have a lot of fun answering to bank examiners and internal audit about why not.  Read my RMA Journal article to see the common issues I encounter.

You can try to do this internally.  But, you likely lack the resources.  My experience is it takes 10-12 hours per review – remember, you have to review the review AND the appraisal report.  Only then can you know if the reviewer missed anything.

Not many of us ever have enough staff to just do our day jobs.  Much less try to now perform reviews of reviews.  Outsourcing this task is the way to go.  Also, it provides an independent view of your staff.

Let me answer two questions I often get asked.  Yes, a QCA/QAR can be performed remotely.  This reduces the cost.  No, every review does not need to be checked.  A well-thought out sampling should let you know if there are any areas of concern.

Lastly, this does not apply to just banks/credit unions with internal review staff.  This applies to financial institutions that use Appraisal Management Companies (AMCs).  It would be prudent to know in advance of your next bank examination or internal audit if your appraisal review process is going to get high marks or has issues you can start addressing asap.

My focus is commercial real estate, so the above is mainly about that.  I am sure there are many advanced ways of addressing the quality of residential appraisal reports and residential reviews.

Please contact me if you are in need of a QCA/QAR!

 

CAN WE END THE DEBATE ON VALUING NATIONAL TENANT RETAIL BUILDINGS

June 29, 2016 – Some people have bucket lists.  I guess I was born to have a list of pet peeves:)

For 25+ years, I have tried to get our industry to identify the correct interest when appraising an existing apartment complex or any property with arm’s-length leases.  It has always been Leased Fee Interest, not Fee Simple Estate.  I can say that finally the majority of appraisers have come to recognize this.  The ‘urban myth’ that we were taught (i.e. if leases are less than 12 months long and/or contract rents are at market, then the interest being appraised is Fee Simple Estate) is almost eradicated.

For 30+ years, I have identified the kitchen and laundry appliances (and any additional common area items that might be in a club house or such) in apartment complexes as FF&E.  Til this day, many appraisers still think refrigerators, stoves/ranges, dishwashers, washing machines, and dryers are real estate!  As a lady on TV many years ago said – Stop The Insanity!

Another item I have been shouting about for almost 25 years is the appraisal of drug stores, big box retailers, and other buildings leased to national tenants.  Capitalizing these leases does NOT yield Market Value of real estate only.  I may have been the only Chief Appraiser that required that the Market Value of Real Estate not exceed the Cost Approach indication with the additional value reflected by the Income and Sales Comparison Approaches having to be identified as an Intangible Asset.  I admit that even allowing the Cost Approach indication to represent real estate value is being way too generous.  These companies usually pay way above market for the land and the cost to build the improvements is absurd – I have seen costs for these basically shell buildings be more than medical office!

FIRREA and FDICIA require that 1) Market Value be of real estate only, and 2) LTV be calculated on Market Value of real estate only.  We all know a shell retail building is not worth $300 or $400/sf as most drug stores have appraised at for 20+ years.  Excluding the inflated land purchase price and using the real value of the land, these properties are lucky to be worth $100/sf in most markets.  Yet, I am sure the vast majority of financial institutions have used the incorrectly stated Market Value provided by appraisers to calculate LTV and base their loan on.  This is similar to those institutions that used, or may still use, Going Concern Value to calculate LTV.

Can we say violation of numerous federal regulations….but I digress.

All of this leads me to two recent articles that I believe finally end this absurd debate.  I highly recommend you find the following articles:

David Charles Lennhoff, CRE, MAI, ‘Valuation of Big-Box Retail for Assessment Purposes: Right Answer to the Wrong Question,’ Real Estate Issues (Volume 39, Number 3, 2014): 21-32.

Stephen D. Roach, MAI, SRA, AI-GRS, ‘Is Excess Rent Intangible?’ The Appraisal Journal (Spring 2016): 121-131.

In my opinion, both authors prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the excess rent present in almost all drug store, and similar leases, is not indicative of the market value of real estate.  They use both theory and real data to prove their points.  Mr. Roach sums up the logic better than I have ever seen (from page 125 of his article):

  • “By definition, the real estate (a property) can produce market rent, but no more.
  • By definition, excess rent exceeds market rent.
  • By definition, excess rent is created by the contract, not the real estate.
  • By definition, a contract is an intangible asset; it’s not real estate.
  • Therefore, excess rent is intangible.

Each step in the argument is based on long-accepted definitions and concepts of the terminology.”

I challenge all of the Chief Appraisers in the country to step up and require appraisals of these properties to appropriately indicate the Market Value of REAL ESTATE ONLY with the huge additional amount above this figure being termed Intangible Value (or something similar).  It is time both appraisers and lending institutions provide the correct value and LTV.

Plus, this will make the lives of us reviewers easier – it has been frustrating to lower the values 50%-75%+ all of these years!  Of course, we could simply order these appraisals from the two authors above and have slam dunk reviews forever:)

 

NEW INTERAGENCY ADVISORY ON EVALUATIONS

March 7, 2016 – For the first time since December, 2010, the Agencies have issued a statement on Evaluations.  I will include the FDIC link below, albeit the Federal Reserve and OCC have similar links.

My feeling is nothing new has been added.  There is a bit more talk about how to use tax assessments – hopefully, this will once again become more common now that The Great Depression II has run most of its course.   Also, they make it clear that market value must be of real property only.  FF&E in apartments and going concern properties must be valued separately, just like in appraisals.

Please pass the link below along to your bank contacts so everyone can stay informed.  Thanks.

https://www.fdic.gov/news/news/fi

nancial/2016/fil16016.html

LESS THAN FEE SIMPLE:)

February 15, 2016 – I hope everyone had a great 3-day weekend.

I figure I will share all of the interesting things I run across in appraisal reports from now on.  As many people tell us reviewers, we should write a book that includes all of these things.  We could probably fill an encyclopedia set (note to Millennials – these were hard copies of Google before there was Google).

Last night, I reviewed a report that stated the property interest appraised was ‘less than fee simple.’  What the heck is that!?!  Apparently the subject had an easement across it for another property to gain access.  I think it is still Fee Simple Estate, but…

So as to include a tidbit of useful info in each of my posts, let me note that the correct terminology to use is Fee Simple Estate, Leased Fee Interest, and Leasehold Interest.  While working on The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, it was pointed out to me that only Fee Simple is an ‘estate.’  The others are ‘interests.’  OK, lesson learned on my part.  Always best to show you are up to date with current trends by using the correct terminology in your industry.

THE ADDENDA FROM HELL

February 12, 2016 – As I sit here on a Friday evening reviewing an appraisal report of an office building in a major CBD, I just have to start sharing my experiences.

This is a $5MM+ property that is 100% leased to several tenants.  Again in a large city CBD.  You get the picture.

As I glance at the Table of Contents, I notice that the Reconciliation is on Page 25.  Only 25 pages to appraise a property of this complexity?

But, it gets better as I look at the Addenda….Page 100 goes by….Page 200 goes by….the report finally ends at Page 245!!!  So, I am about to review 25 pages of analysis followed by 220 pages of who knows what.  This must be a record!

Oh the life of a reviewer…. 🙂

A GUEST POSTER’S VIEW ON THE ECONOMY

February 1 – Following is my first guest post.  Bruce Cumming, Jr. is the author.  He can be reached at 941.926.0800 or bcumming@hettemasaba.com.

We would like to note that from an academic-business perspective real estate is viewed as a sub-discipline of finance, finance as a sub-discipline of economics and the classical economist such as Adam Smith and David Ricardo referred to their discipline as “political-economy” linking economies with the political mode of a country, state, county, or municipality.  The following is some economic theory and emerging issue that could impact real estate values.

According to the Austrian business cycle theory, central banks (such as the US Federal Reserve System and specifically its Federal Open Markets Committee) can set interest rates too low for too long, which can create an artificial boom and distort the accuracy of data on a trend line basis, often causing what is termed “malinvestment.”  According to an article by Mauldin Economics, based upon a graph of the US 10-Year Treasury Rates going back to 1790, 10-Year Treasury Rates over the long-term averaged just less than 6% and the average over the last 50 years was 6.58%.  The current 10-Year Treasury rate according to the US Department of the Treasury is 2.06%, or about 394 basis points below the 200-plus year average rate and 452 basis points below the 50-plus year average rate.  The Federal Open Markets Committee just increased its rate for the first time since December 16, 2008, on December 17, 2015.  The Federal Funds Rate has been between 0% and 0.25% for 7 years.  The Federal Funds Rate is now between 0.25% and 0.50%.  The US stock market has been in rapid decline so far in January of 2016.

The McKinsey Global Institute’s report, Debt and (Not Much) Deleveraging, dated February 2015, reports that between 2007:Q7 and 2014 worldwide debt have increased from $142 trillion to $199 trillion, an increase of $57 trillion, or 40.14%.  Debt has not been liquidated during the so called Great Recession, but has been increased, thereby potentially distorting asset values.

It should be noted that the Green Street CPPI:  All-Property Index (which was started in December of 1997) was 22.7% higher in December of 2015 than in December of 2007, its previous peak.  Green Street tends to focus on investment grade real estate and is tightly tied to the capital markets.  The Moody’s/RCA CPPI, which focuses on repeat sales of properties greater than $2,500,000 in value, saw its last peak in 2007:Q3 (165) and reached that same level in 2015:Q3 (165).  The trough reported by this index was in 2009:Q4/2010:Q1 (96), so the index has increased 71.88% from trough to peak.

Austrian economists theorize that the artificial monetary boom ends when bank credit expansion finally stops, which is when no further investments can be found which provide adequate returns for speculative, or “Ponzi” borrowers.  The Austrian business cycle theory asserts that the longer the artificial monetary boom goes on, the more speculative and “Ponzi” the borrowing occurs, the more errors and waste committed, the longer and more severe the workout period (e.g., bankruptcies, foreclosures, and short-sales) until equilibrium is achieved through market-based price discovery.

The Austrian business cycle theory is one of the precursors to the modern credit cycle theory, which is emphasized by Post-Keynesian economists at the Bank for International Settlements and by mainstream academic economists such as the late Hyman Minsky (PhD/economics, Harvard).  Post-Keynesian Minsky taught at Brown University and the University of California at Berkeley among others.  Minsky’s financial instability hypothesis is translated to real estate markets by borrower type.

Minsky theorized that a key mechanism that pushes an economy toward a financial crisis is debt accumulation by the private sector.  He identified three types of borrowers:  hedge borrowers, speculative borrowers, and “Ponzi” borrowers.

„      Hedge borrowers:  can pay both interest and principal loan payments from current cash flows (e.g., traditional mortgage).

„      Speculative borrowers: can pay interest only loan payments, but must regularly roll over the principal (e.g., interest-only loan).

„      “Ponzi” borrowers:  cannot pay interest or principal, and depend upon asset price appreciation sufficient to refinance the debt (e.g., negative-amortization loan), only asset price appreciation keeps the “Ponzi” borrower afloat.

If “Ponzi” borrowing is widespread enough during a credit boom when asset prices stop raising rapidly the “Ponzi” borrower can no longer operate profitably (or at all) and once asset prices start to decline the speculative borrower may not be able to roll over their loan principal and could face a technical, if not a real default.  The final financial domino is the hedge borrowers who are unable to find loans despite the apparent soundness of the underlying assets.  The market begins to unravel, that is to say, a “Minsky Moment” occurs.

Former PIMCO managing director Paul McCulley (MBA, Columbia) is credited with coining the phrase, “Minsky Moment,” when referring to the point in any credit cycle, or business cycle when investors begin having cash flow problems due to the spiraling debt incurred in financing speculative assets.  At this point, a major sell off begins because no counterparty can be found to bid at the high asking prices previously quoted, leading to a sudden and precipitous collapse in prices driving market clearing asset prices down as well as a sharp drop in market liquidity.  The “Minsky Moment” comes after a long period of prosperity and increasing asset values, which has encouraged increasing amounts of speculation using borrowed money.

Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises (PhD, University of Vienna) who taught at New York University theorized that a financial crisis emerges when consumers seek to reestablish their desired allocation of saving and consumption at the prevailing interest rate.  The ensuing recession or depression is the process by which the economy adjusts to the errors and wastes (malinvestment) of the boom, or bubble.

It remains too early in the current cycle to confirm that a “Minsky Moment” has occupied, or if the current stock market activity is a short-term correction that will rebound in a few weeks, or months.

It should also be noted that during that during the last downturn vacant land decreased in value at a far greater rate than improved properties that could be income generating.  A paired repeat sales analysis study that we conducted indicated that vacant land was declining at a rate of about 1.35% per month (rounded) versus improved sales that were declining at a rate of about 0.75% per month (rounded).  Land was declining in price at an 80% greater rate than improved property.

Generally, entitlements are only worth about what they cost during a normal market and are “usually worthless” during a downturn, such as we recently experienced.

The current macro-level economic activities have not yet impacted real estate values, they may and they may not.  Time will tell…

 

 

THE BIG SHORT – A Movie All Americans Need To See

January 16, 2016 – I went to see The Big Short today.  I encourage everyone to go see it.

After seeing this movie, you will know why I list Banks among The World’s 3 Greatest Evils (I won’t go into the other 2 at this time).  You will know why I took on Fifth Third Bank and suffered for 7 years to achieve vindication.  And why I look so forward to all of the other whistleblowers out there getting their share of that and many other banks.

For me, it was an emotional movie.  I lived it and knew it at the time.  I can totally relate to Mark Baum, and really the others who went short, as it was an obvious winning bet – but, to win, the American public had to be decimated and we knew banks and Wall Street would be bailed out by the taxpayer.  Corporate Socialism I heard it called recently.

It was good to see the few other people that forecast what I termed in June 2005 The Great Depression II (c).  Unlike them, I just didn’t make a few billion dollars:(  I am glad they did at the cost of ‘the smart money’ on Wall Street.  Yes, a few of us can be right and 99.99% of the World can be wrong.   Remember Mann’s Axiom….

Money will be made shorting the current Echo Bubble during this Echo Depression(c).  It just won’t be as much as last time since the bullish housing people know what the shorts are doing this time around.

I was interviewing with the OCC in the Summer of 2008 and they asked me if I thought banks had learned their lesson.  I said ‘NO’ and that as soon as the pendulum swung back to optimism they would do everything all over again.  I have been told things are even worse today than in the bubble years.  Scary.  The OCC then asked me what it would take to stop banks from being so wreckless.  My answer was to enforce the FIRREA penalties that would allow the government to fine and imprison individuals – the corporate veil does not protect employees that violate FIRREA.  I won’t give it away, but the movie tells us how many bankers have been arrested for the housing debacle – you won’t be surprised, but should be disappointed in the system.

Today, my solution to get banks to clean up their act is simple – eliminate the FDIC deposit insurance.  The public would demand 100% transparency and total safe lending and practices before they would put their money in a bank.  Of course, and saying this I sound like Mark Baum for sure, this would just move all of the unethical and greedy people from banks to non-bank lenders.  The scum keeps moving to where it can thrive.

Speaking of which, the scum have renamed CDOs today as ‘Bespoke Tranche Obligations (BTOs).  Also, a residential lender told me that lenders are starting to do ‘Statement Loans.’  They simply look at your bank statement to see your income and don’t request your tax return.  This is the first step in the direction of the old NINJA-type loans.

I encourage anyone in the industry that encounters these products to collect all of the info you can and go to the authorities so these people can be prosecuted when the time comes – I will be glad to advise you on what steps to take.  Also, investors should remember a rose is a rose is a rose.

Please go see the movie.  Please tell everyone you know to go see the movie.

 

FF&E – FIRREA vs. USPAP

January 7, 2016 – Below is a question I received followed by my reply.  Happy New Year to all.

George – Hope your holidays were great and 2015 is finishing off strong.  I was hoping to get your opinion on an item below.

It’s just how non-realty items are reported in the appraisal report. No change at all in the new USPAP – I’ve just been inconsistent in how I treat it. Sometimes I show a $ allocation, sometimes I don’t and just say it is included in the value and has a positive effect on value. Either way, I’m always clear on whether non-real property items are in the value or not.

So just trying to nail down exactly what is right or what USPAP expects. I’ve seen personal property treated many different ways and some appraisers still don’t say anything about it… USPAP doesn’t say much on the topic.

Thanks for any input!

As stated in Standards Rule 1-4, part (G): When personal property, trade fixtures, or intangible items are included in the appraisal, the appraiser must analyze the effect on value of such non-real property items.

My question is what is the extent of “analyzing the effect on value?” For instance, in a multifamily property with appliances necessary for continued operation, do we need to actually state the estimated amount that the appliances contribute to value or is it sufficient to note that the market value includes all personal property items which contribute to the market value?  If the value needs to be broken down and allocated between real property and non-real property items – can the allocation be stated once near the beginning of the appraisal report or does the allocation have to be every place where there is a market value stated?

Just curious because I have heard several versions and I didn’t really see any Advisory Opinions on the topic.

============  MY REPLY ============================

Your question only exists because the ASB and AI and others won’t specifically address the various differences between USPAP and FIRREA.
The bottomline is USPAP does NOT require a value on the FF&E.  Albeit, it would probably help all clients to know such.  More info cannot hurt.
However, FIRREA DOES require values be allocated to FF&E and Business/Intangible Assets so that the appraiser provides the ONLY required value per FIRREA – Market Value As Is of REAL ESTATE ONLY.
So, when doing an appraisal for a Federally-Related Transaction, you MUST provide a value for the non-realty items.  It has been that way since 1990/1991.
Where you place it….well that is up to you.  But, technically, when you state Market Value As Is (as well as Upon Completion and Upon Stabilization) it should just be the Real Estate Only number.
However, 99%+ of appraisers state Market Value INCLUSIVE of FF&E and Biz Value and then have some kind of footnote or wording in parentheses saying ‘the above includes $1,400 of FF&E’. Something like that.  They let the Bank do the math to get to the real estate only number.
So, you can do it that way and you will be in line with your peers.  As I always tell appraisers though, if you want to stand out from the crowd provide what your client really needs, and in this case, state MV without the FF&E and Biz Value and then let the footnote say how much the FF&E and Biz Values are worth.

The reason banks need the Real Estate Only number is it is Federal law (FDICIA of 1991) that LTV must (!) be calculated on this number only.  Any MV number that includes FF&E and/or Biz Value is worthless to a bank!

Now, for non-Bank clients you can forget all of the above.  However, I still recommend providing the separate values.
I hope this helps.

Many Thanks To All

October 15, 2015 – Since the announcement that I had a hand in making 5/3 Bank pay an $85MM fine, I have received over a 100 emails of support. First, I must thank all of my family and friends that sent emails and supported me over the past 7 years, and longer.

Also, a special thanks to my former staff that sent congratulations.  It was with your buy in of my program that we were able to receive a Best In Class in the Nation rating from bank examiners.  We could not have achieved that without everyone believing that things can be done 100% ethically with no caving in ever.

The emails I received had similar themes:

  • You are Da Mann!
  • Good for you for fighting the good fight, and that you were vindicated. I just can’t believe their shareholders didn’t take this a little more seriously.
  • Wow!  A resounding vindication and testament to your integrity.  Well done.  You are a man to admire.
  • Wow George!  Congratulations!! And BTW as a taxpayer thank you!
  • congrats george.  thanks for winning one for the good guys
  • Glad that you are finally able to get this out in the open and be vindicated.  They certainly picked on the wrong guy back in 2008 didn’t they?!
  • Your ethics and patience are admirable.
  • It warms my heart to see 5/3 hand over $$ for their many abuses.
  • Congrats Mr. Mann. Thanks for having the guts to step up and take a rip at a monster that is out of control.

I wonder how many emails of support 5/3 received?  LOL

I will write more over the next few months.  Nothing in the settlement requires my silence.  I went the route I did because I would never agree to be silent.  It was a long, tough route, but it was worth it.  Everyone deserves to know the full truth.

For now, I leave you with the song that got me thru many tough situations over the past 20+ years.  Give it a listen any time someone wants you to compromise your ethics.

Til next time….

I Won’t Back Down

Tom Petty

Well I won’t back down
No I won’t back down
You can stand me up at the gates of hell
But I won’t back down

No I’ll stand my ground, won’t be turned around
And I’ll keep this world from draggin me down
gonna stand my ground
… and I won’t back down

Hey baby, there ain’t no easy way out
(and I won’t back down…)
hey I will stand my ground
and I won’t back down

Well I know what’s right, I got just one life
in a world that keeps on pushin me around
but I’ll stand my ground
…and I won’t back down