Three months prior to my meeting with Citibank, I had appraised (for a different lender) a potential subdivision north of Mexico City, outside the Distrito Federal and inside the Estado de Mexico. It was a piece of steep hillside land zoned for 100 homes. A neighboring subdivision had already failed, with only 18 homes being built. The immediate neighborhood lacked through streets to Federal Highway 57D, a few miles east, which is the main highway leading south into Mexico City. Many of the streets were unpaved and used mainly by stray dogs.
Several months later, my lender client contacted me to inform me that Cushman & Wakefield had since appraised the Mexican land for more than 17 times the value I had estimated. In reading their report it became obvious that the young appraiser had assumed that the property would be rezoned to 15 times its current permitted density, despite instructions from the lender to appraise “as is”. When asked why she made such an extraordinary assumption, the appraiser said that the loan broker told her to, despite no documented evidence of a zoning change in progress. Her report was co-signed by two appraisers with signatures accompanied by designations, but neither went to see the property.
Three years later, Citibank’s venture into subdivision lending in Mexico has been a loss-spewing disaster. I wonder if Cushman & Wakefield was who they hired. I don’t wonder, though, why C&W is facing more than $10 billion in appraisal malpractice lawsuits at the moment.
Meanwhile, a private lender client started telling me in the last year that they could not use me on particular appraisal assignments because the loan applicant had insisted on use of a “national firm”.
I had lunch with a Wells Fargo appraisal executive last summer and asked him if there was some type of “national firms only” trend going on, and he said that the requests only came from loan applicants, who understand that most of the national firms (and international firms) are brokerages and brokerages tend to appraise high, which pleases all their customers. Low values are bad for the brokerage business, and there are other conflicts of interest to consider, too.
The brokerages maintain that a Chinese wall separates their appraisers from undue influence from the sales and leasing side and that there is no bias. Some even claim to be separate companies. At Jones Lang Wootton we appraisers were generally left alone to reach our own value conclusions, but unexpectedly low appraisals sometimes had to be finessed or negotiated, such as in situations where someone’s foolishness had to be covered up (“But we told them to buy that building!”). Conflicts of interest arose because we were a full-service brokerage, and appraisal revenues are less than real estate sales, leasing and management revenues. For that reason, appraiser independence is always at risk of being compromised at brokerage firms.
I see the same forces at work with other international brokerages with valuation subsidiaries.
For instance, I have a client that finances discounted loan payoffs who sent me to research a situation in Baltimore in which they would finance a discounted loan payoff on a defaulted construction loan (from Citibank) for a 4.8 million square foot mixed use center on a waterfront brownfield next to the city’s impoverished and dangerous Westport neighborhood. There had been a lack of pre-leasing and pre-sales and the property was going into foreclosure.
Most of the comparable sales were over 4 years old and two were from Philadelphia and Yonkers, New York. I researched local sales and found recent waterfront or waterview land sales in the neighborhood, surely something he could have found in CBRE’s “unrivaled database”. When I asked him why he excluded those sales, though, he said that they were irrelevant because they were “distress sales”, as if the subject property was not in distress.
Suspecting bias, I uncovered a conflict of interest: CBRE had recently received the exclusive leasing contract for the high-rise office building approved for this site. This leasing contract had the potential to dwarf the amount of the appraisal fee.
This waterfront site has been in bankruptcy and was scheduled to be auctioned earlier this year, which was postponed until the bankruptcy was discharged, which happened last month.
When the national firm has already been working for the other side
Sometimes the conflict of interest is because the national firm had already been hired by the loan applicant or broker. My number one client is a wholesale lender, and many loan applications are accompanied by unsolicited appraisals from national firms. I end up having to reject such appraisals for reasons such as:
1. “Extraordinary assumptions”, such as rezoning.
2. Out-of-area comparable sales, always a surprise when coming from national firms that brag about their local databases.
3. Gamed discounted cash flow models which never have increasing expense ratios or assume that declining markets turn around in a V-shaped recovery.
4. Failure to deduct for deferred maintenance or site problems.
Other national firms
Colliers and HVS also bear mentioning because of their heavy use by developers and brokers.
Colliers International has been rapidly expanding their appraisal business to catch up with CBRE and C&W, but this means not properly vetting new appraisers. The property in the Dominican Republic was also appraised by Colliers, who sent an appraiser to fly over the property in a helicopter but photographed and appraised the wrong property. I was also recently sent to Texas to visit a failed subdivision appraised for $6 million by Colliers although the discounted loan payoff had steadily been reduced from $2.7 million to $2.3 million over the past year. Never in the 186-page report did the Colliers appraiser mention that the subdivision was situated alongside an active railway.
HVS is a different type of company, as it is not a brokerage but mainly an appraisal company (Hospitality Valuation Services) founded by Steve Rushmore, the author of the textbook most commonly used for hotel valuation. They tend to hire fresh graduates from the hotel schools at Cornell and Lausanne but fail to train them in due diligence (such as verification of owner-supplied information). HVS also now licenses its name to too many other firms internationally and fails to vet these firms. The boilerplate in the HVS reports looks the same everywhere but sometimes bears little relation to the appraiser-written narrative. One egregious report I discussed last year was a proposed 5-star marina hotel on a lochside brownfield in Scotland done for a con man who falsely claimed to own the site. HVS did not check title nor did they check to find out that the site had no marina permit. Ironically, Colliers International appraised this property (as complete) for 113 million pounds sterling.
So when I hear that a borrower insists on a “national firm only”, what I think they really mean is “we can’t take a risk getting an honest appraisal”.