“I was so happy, but then it just sinks in. It sinks that what my house devalued, I was.” – Carlette DuffyIndianapolis house owner who discovered her house was undervalued.

When a house is estimated, homeowners not only miss the higher home appreciation, but also the entire community (roads, bridges, fire brigades, water and sewerage systems, waste collection, street lighting, disaster help, ems, parks, schools, real estate, real estate, real estate, etc.). That is why it is astonishing that the process for fair assessments (specifically, when a value has to be challenged) is so complicated, depending on where you are in the US

Federal (or national) standards help ensure that, regardless of where an American homeowner has real estate, she can probably expect that the process is comparable for a fair assessment. This makes it easier for homeowners, but news flash: usually everyone who is directly involved in the transaction, plus the surrounding community, is to take advantage.

Unfortunately, the recent (2024) policy – which made it easier for American homeowners to challenge an unfair assessment – cut as the Trump government has made more federal fair housing construction.

On March 19, 2025, the general deputy -assistant -Secretary of Housing, Jeffrey Little, sent a mortgage letter For all real estate agents, final agents, lenders and other relevant parties that withdraw three policy measures created to guarantee a national standard for fair treatment, even if an assessment must be challenged.

How Little’s Letter Fair Housing (and Lending⁣) can harm

⁣ What has been canceled: ML 2024-07 (Assessment assessment and reconsideration of value updates)

This policy had national rules to have borrowers ask for a second glance if they thought their house had been assessed too low (a reconsideration of value called). The icing on the cake was that this policy had rules to protect borrowers against paying extra costs if the assessment was wrong. Now that it has been canceled, borrowers return to possible to pay for a second assessment, without error, if the first was unfair or incorrect.

The Late Shani Moss, which is published Her last days try to get an honest assessment Instead of repairing cancer treatments and spending time with her family, an example of why a national standard is needed.

What is being canceled: ML 2021-27 (Appraisal Fair Housing Compliance and updated General Appraiser Requirements)

This policy ensured that appraisers followed strict rules to prevent them from being unfair, as everyone treats equally, regardless of their breed or where they lived.

Little confirmed in his letter that:

“Voorafgaand aan de publicatie van deze ML waren er bezorgdheid dat de uniforme normen van de ethische regel van de professionele beoordelingspraktijk (USPAP) onvoldoende was om de kwestie duidelijk aan te pakken. Aangezien de publicatie van ML 2021- 27, de beoordeling van de ML van de USPAP-ETHICS REEER in de 2024-editie van USPAP en heeft vastgelegd in de 2024-editie van USPAP en de Instructions of the ML of the ML of Upap from Upap and the contact of the ML of Upap from Upap and recorded in the 2024 edition of Upap.

Despite this recovery of the federal government, the Apraisal Foundation must be welcomed to make this an ethical standard. Hopefully it will remain absent from a rural enforceable standard.

What is being canceled: ML 2024-07 (Assessment assessment and reconsideration of value updates)

⁣

This policy required mortgage companies to check reviews to ensure that they were honest. In the letter from Little, he admitted that “feedback in the industry encourages a consistent industry-wide standard for processing ROVs” and that the Fair Housing Administration had only started collecting data to follow ROV requests initiated by borrowers and to follow their results in October 2024. As a result, there is little recognized policy that the short time frame is that the short time frame is that the short time frame is the short time frame. ”

However, this consistent data will no longer be collected.

To give context to this policy, the recent 2025 Snapshot from Race and buy at home in America The National Association of RealTors® Research Group showed that every racial group (so this is not only a ‘black issue’) believed that it experienced unfair reviews to a certain extent (the respondents of the Spanish/Latino survey were less than 1%). More than ninety -two percent of those who have experienced a form of unfair homes, however, did not bother to report this.

Avoiding the McNamara abuse, those figures are important.

In short, it is no secret that reporting observed unfair homes is not easy. Thought out to the assessment of the “Industry Feedback” assessment that encourages “a consistent industrial-wide standard for processing ROVs” will the assessment foundation use to be part of their standards and practices?

“The Fair Housing Act was a start, but our work is not nearly over yet.”

– Barbara Jordan

Lee Davenort is an international real estate trainer (as well as a former RE/Max Managing Broker and Agent).

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial department of Housingwire and the owners.

To contact the editor who is responsible for this piece: zeb@hwmedia.com.Dr. Lee Davenport is a real estate coach/educator and author.