Pretending to be white will raise the value of your home

This outcome has been demonstrated in the past, as well. It has often been used to bludgeon deniers of systemic racism.

Different example from last year:

"The family immediately called their lender and pushed back. After a month of escalating their complaints, The Austins were approved for a second appraisal.

When the day came for inspection, they got creative with the process.

"We had a conversation with one of our white friends, and she said 'No problem. I'll be Tenisha. I'll bring over some pictures of my family,'" Austin said. "She made our home look like it belonged to her."


The home appraised for $1,482,000, or roughly $500,000 more than it appraised for just weeks prior."

Black California couple lowballed by $500K in home appraisal, believe race was a factor

 

Pretending to be black or Hispanic can land you a job. I don't even have to explain that one.

 

So then you think it’s okay to discriminate against black people when it comes to real estate appraisal?

 

Pretending??? Please explain.

.

 

Do you think it is OK to discriminate against white people when it comes to jobs?

 

I oppose discrimination against all people. See how easy that was? Now your turn. Do you think black people should be discriminated against when it comes to real estate appraisal, which is the topic of this thread?

 

The last time I put on blackface and said “Hola, amigos” while walking into a job interview didn’t work out so well for me.

Got any tips?

 

'51 is just trying to muddy the waters from the OP.

 

While completely missing the point that the thing he complained about is a direct result of the systemic racism prevalent in the US for generations-especially redlining in the housing market- which is the whole point of the thread-that in some places it still does exist.

 

Appraisals can be a hoot. And discrimination may very well have happened here. But it looks
Like there might be more pieces to the puzzle.

“Lanham’s company, 20/20 Valuations, performed the appraisal for loanDepot and returned a valuation that was more than $75,000 below the conservative estimate of valuation which loanDepot had given the couple, according to the lawsuit.”

So it appears a conservative estimate from the bank was given to the appraiser which tells me that was what the couple needed the appraisal to be for the refinance. And they got an estimate that was $75K below which means the bank thought the house was worth $550K. That is pretty low from a conservative estimate for sure on a refinance at 13.6% low I would think.

But to then get 36.4% above what the first banks conservative estimate was with the second company seems high. Now this assumes the banks conservative estimate is right.

Now I have not needed an appraisal for a while. But when we bought our building…in discussions I made the comment a low appraisal would be alright by me as we had not negotiated a final sale price. Well the appraisal was so low it made it so we had get a second appraisal to get a higher valuation as the low one made the negotiations not possible unless we brought way more to the table than we were prepared to at the time. The higher valuation came in $170K higher.

This was a $275K difference on a property worth less than our building at the time we bought it. And I thought it was crazy two appraisers could come up as far sort as they did with our building.

 

You're right!

Also, 51's counter example is not remotely equivalent to the OP. The OP is an illustration of discrimination based on race. 51's example has two parties... the applicant who is lying but not discriminating about race and the employer who is actively trying not to discriminate. So, in hindsight, 51's post is even less of a contribution than it appeared a first glance.

 

omg This only happens when companies have excluded black people in the past hiring decisions. It’s an attempt to right a wrong. Being born a white male still gives us a leg up on almost any other person in this country.

 

If you want to change the subject, start a new thread with a new newstory about it.

 

In 1991 I bought an old Victorian house on the wrong side of the train tracks in Atlanta. The banks used to call us daily trying to lend my wife and I money. We were in a historically red lined area that the banks were legally obligated to increase their lending in. The banks brilliant solution was to compete to lend money to the white people in the area.

 

Well then we agree on that, I'm just pointing out there are times white people are discriminated against too and they are more common that people like to think.

 

Even if I really am white?

 

I will take an appraiser's position in loving memory of GatorKnights for the board.

First, there is racial discrimination in real estate. There has always been and to deny it is simply naïve.

There have been many similar stories over the past few years of two appraisals being performed with two differing results and a racial component seemingly the only factor for discrepancy. It could be that the appraiser is, in fact, racist whether knowingly or not.

Most of the stories are about the same. The first appraisal is "low" and therefore must be bad. The second appraisal has a higher opinion of value and must be accurate. This is an assumption made without much information about the contents of the appraisal or a third party review of each report. There is not enough information in the published articles to really form an opinion either way.

Most residential appraisals rely on the Sales Comparison Approach to value (comparable sales) and recent sales of similar properties are compared to the subject and adjustments applied to account for differences.

Where some of the "appraisal bias" accusations come from are that historically black neighborhoods often show values lower than a similar historically white neighborhood and that the appraisal methods utilized are responsible for this continuing cycle.

The problem is that the appraiser is simply reporting the actual sales prices from the immediate neighborhood and location being the biggest contributing factor to value, the appraiser is doing the job just as he or she was trained and required by regulatory agencies, lenders, and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP).

The easiest example to use was a case in Chicago where there were two similar mid-rise condo buildings; one predominantly black and one predominantly white. The buildings were in close proximity and had similar amenities available to the residents.

Not surprisingly, the "white" condo building had units which consistently sold for a higher price than the "black" building. The complaint offered was that this cycle would never be broken until appraisers started to use comparable sales from the "white" building when appraising a "black" building unit.

The problem is this would be exactly what appraisers have been trained NOT to do... go to another neighborhood or location to find comparable sales for the sole purpose of finding a higher value. The "black" building had a sufficient number of recent closed sales and were the most similar in location. The appraiser is reporting that sales data. The lenders want to know the value of units in that particular building and it really has nothing to do with race.

 

In the case here it looked like the appraiser broke that rule. He didn’t use local sales near that house but used comparable sales from the nearest black neighborhood. It seems to me that the appraiser was the racist here. The mortgage company that hired him is being sued because they have the deeper pockets.

 

That could very well be the case but without some local knowledge of that immediate real estate market it is tough to make any determination. Certainly, as the article presents itself, the original appraiser went to a predominantly black neighborhood to find comparable sales when sales were available in the immediate subject neighborhood and that would be totally wrong and could/should have the appraiser in hot water.