Powered by MOMENTUM MEDIA
lawyers weekly logo
Lender

'No underlying systemic issue' with valuations: ValEx

6 minute read
The Adviser

ValEx has defended itself against industry attacks and revealed that less than one per cent of valuations get altered.

Property valuations have been a hot topic since The Adviser reported last week that brokers had raised serious concerns about valuations.

The FBAA then said it would ask APRA to investigate how mortgage valuations are calculated.

CoreLogic RP Data said it handles about 1.4 million residential and commercial valuations per year through its ValEx and VMS platforms.

 
 

General manager of operations Michael Hooper said that gives CoreLogic RP Data "the most comprehensive, accurate and reliable data with which to properly inform this debate".

Mr Hooper said that 90 per cent of residential valuations come within 10 per cent of the sale price.

He also said that 69 per cent of residential valuations come within 10 per cent of the owner's estimated market value.

There is a one per cent pricing variation between different valuation firms when the assessed market value is compared to the owner's estimated market value, Mr Hooper also said.

"In other words, there are no significant variations between valuation firms," he said.

Mr Hooper said that only 2.4 per cent of valuations each month are disputed by brokers or lenders.

He added that of that 2.4 per cent, only 26 per cent are altered in value – or less than one per cent of the total monthly volume.

Mr Hooper acknowledged that there would always be valuations that don't meet the needs or interests of all stakeholders to support a loan application.

"However, based on the aggregated data set out above, it is clear that there is no underlying systemic issue," he said.

Mr Hooper also said it was important for people to understand what ValEx does and doesn't do.

ValEx is a platform that acts as a conduit for instructions to be sent to panel firms and reports to then be delivered to clients, Mr Hooper said.

"ValEx is not responsible for the content of either the client's instructions or the panel valuer's valuation reports," he said.

"ValEx does not undertake valuations, nor does it interfere with valuation outcome. ValEx is a workflow system that enables end-to-end management of the valuation process."

[Related: Valuers defend themselves against broker attacks]

default

JOIN THE DISCUSSION

You need to be a member to post comments. Become a member for free today!

Comments (18)

  • <p>Instead of living in lala land Valtex company need to get themself a reality check ..<br>- Inexperianced staff<br>- No customer service <br>- No process / valuation methodology</p>
    0
  • <p>Before Valex, the system worked better. If nothing was wrong with the current system, why are so many different Brokers, from different places, criticising it ? At a time when innovation is lacking in our industry, there is an opportunity for Lenders to drop the Valex system and go back to having their own Panel of Valuers. This would allow for faster, and more direct communication, between the parties involved, and lead to better outcomes. Which Lenders will take up this challenge ?</p>
    0
  • <p>We are now getting to the crux of the Matter LMI Premiums based on valuation &lt;br /&gt;In a perfect world If we had saved better deposit and lower LVR there would not be a need for the vulture species known as mortgagus insurerus &lt;br /&gt;Part of the issue is living beyond our means and wanting to have the best house in the street as a starting point (I think it is known as walking before you crawl)&lt;br /&gt;The reality (I think there is another word I can't use)will hit the fan then we will have ? on our face when rates finally go up 2% There will be plenty of bargains on the market then and red faces to match probably one or two claims against LMI policies This leaves Two questions how many claims are there against LMI Policies in the current market and are the premiums fair (I can see why we now have institutions wanting to self insure)</p>
    0
  • <p>Mr Hooper says 1.4 mill @ 2.4% = 33600/12=2800 challenges pcm = about 140 per day challenged --VALEX dont have the staff /expertise to handle this - which is why you poor brokers always get a no (the no means no time to sort that many complaints a day!!)&lt;br /&gt;2.4% sounds great until you break it down into the real numbers&lt;br /&gt;Mr Hooper also says"ValEx is not responsible for the content of either the client's instructions or the panel valuer's valuation reports,WRONG -valex are on the record as liasing with API and lenders regarding valuations / standards/ panel contracts etc - all this has an impact on the actual valuation... - ONLY a conduit yeah right &lt;br /&gt;dont pull our leg it is JUST a conduit - it has a lot more influence and say than that - another player( competition) could help them sort their 140 complaints a day?- nice try and great bit of "corporate speak" mr Hooper</p>
    0
  • <p>I agree that it is often a waste of time to dispute Valuations as ego's do get in the way. An independent dispute process may have merits. I had a property in Kensington Vic valued by three different valuers with Values of $720,000, $900,000 and $965,000. That is a 25% variation, something wrong there. More recently had a property Valued in Warrenwood for $620,000, $700,000 &amp; $730,000 - over 15% variation. From my perspective these results highlight that there are some extremely poor valuers in the market place.</p>
    0
  • <p>The point with all this is that APRA and others are concerned about the lenders and their stability should another GFC or something similar occur. They are targeting interest only loans, investors etc. The way I see it is that lenders are in fact relying on inconsistent and often inaccurate valuations to make lending decisions. What is more risky than that? We also should not forget that in many cases computer generated desk top valuations are used with questionable data and without a valuers input. In effect the valuation industry is also at risk. As if valuers are not under enough pressure from the valex monopoly and the banks.</p>
    0
  • <p>1% updated!!! Thats because Valuers have a God complex and often treat our disputes as if to say "How dare you question my professional opinion!"&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;There needs to be an independent party that decides on disputes! thats all, not a total overhaul of the system, but most brokers know that if you want to make a dispute you may as well give up because no matter how much evidence you give, no matter how many other valuations you provide showing others' 'expert' opinion, they still make their own decision and their ego comes into it too much for them to ever concede&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;CHANGE THE DISPUTE PROCESS!!!!!!!!!!</p>
    0
  • <p>Due to this system not allowing me to say much, suffice to say the valuation system sucks.&lt;br /&gt;There is no independence, why is it that valuation firm's can't allow assignment between lenders? What's to hide?&lt;br /&gt;3 years ago 2 valuations for 2 clients 1st came in $25K short of build price $500K(CBA) I contested but waste of time I had it valued by ANZ and they came in short by $1K they could accept that sadly they couldn't use ANZ. The excuse was the builder was ripping off the client as his cost per sq. meter was deemed excessive 2nd client had his more expensive build come in exactly as per contract and additional quotes for non-builder items $850K (CBA) their cost per sq. meter was nearly 40% higher so how does it work. &lt;br /&gt;We need independence not a monopoly. I'm assuming there were problems in the past but way too many in the present.</p>
    0
  • <p>What the others have said AND "Mr Hooper said that 90 per cent of residential valuations come within 10 per cent of the sale price". That is shockingly bad. If the figure is not closer to 100% there is something seriously wrong. Maybe its all the off the plans sold to the Chinese.</p>
    0
  • <p>Two weeks ago we submitted a valuation request on land purchase and construction, located in a new estate an older suburb of Ngunnawal, ACT. The only unusual extra was that this 4 bedroom double garage home has two ensuits. The valuation came back $56k lower than the construction contract price. We evidenced three other recent sales, including one with two ensuites, but were told that the property would not be worth the cost of construction in that suburb, and the original valuation still stands.</p>
    0
Attach images by dragging & dropping or by selecting them.
The maximum file size for uploads is MB. Only files are allowed.
 
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
The maximum number of 3 allowed files to upload has been reached. If you want to upload more files you have to delete one of the existing uploaded files first.
Posting as
magazine
Read the latest issue of The Adviser magazine!
The Adviser is the number one magazine for Australia's finance and mortgage brokers. The publications delivers news, analysis, business intelligence, sales and marketing strategies, research and key target reports to an audience of professional mortgage and finance brokers
Read more
You have3 free articles left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content, or become a PREMIUM MEMBER to enjoy a wide range of benefits
You have 3 free articles left this month.
Register for a free account to access unlimited free content, or become a PREMIUM MEMBER to enjoy a wide range of benefits