Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[Bearslide]

With Adobe PDF, using that program which was designed to make an identical copy of the appraisal report. If/when any changes to the report are seen, it is a technical error. All one would have to do, is run the adobe writer once again to correct any found errors (which in my experience is less than very rare). However, the AI Ready and Lighthouse conversion programs have in their design for changes to be made to the report, and some pages will not convert at all.

To say these three are all very similar "conversion" programs is just not correct. PDF is designed to make an exact copy, the other two are not.

Ditto - thanks, TJ - you saved me a lot of typing.

 

[Bill_FL]

Here is the reality. Our world operates on digital data. Our clients have invested millions in technology to streamline their business in the most productive way they can. Keypunch operators are gone. Having a person rekey data that we can send them digitally is a waste of resources. So, we know they want our services; we know they want our data digitally. We have laws that we have to abide by, including the secure signature. Alamode is currently woring on their signature securty feature. Dont remember exactly, but some kind of coding system that works off of the value, etc. We have to come up with a way to provide what our customers want and need, digtal data, yet comply with the laws. Somehow, there has to be a way to transmit the data digitally, let them lift the data they need out of the data file, attach that "key" to it so that it can be verified that there has been o change to the data, yet the actual report delivered to the client is EXACTLY what we produced on our computer. They do not want a reformatted form. They just want the data in the form in their computer systems. The paper output is just for file stuffing.

It seems that all of the current vendors and plug in providers each have a small part of this puzzle, but none have put the entire thing together yet.

 

[Fred]

How many of you here have ever seen one of your Fannie form appraisal reports 'converted' into a .pdf document that removed many of your text comments fields of your Fannie form appraisal reports and put it "See attached addendum" instead of your own comments?

How many of you here have ever seen one of your Fannie form appraisal reports 'converted' into a .pdf document that removed many of your addendum pages?

Never saw one, but I could do that to a report copy and look at. Then, I could say I saw one. What would I learn from that process?

 

[Bearslide]

Yes, I do. As I said before, that "warning" was crafted at a time when AlaMode was developing an alternative standard. It was crafted to strike fear, and that's exactly what it has done.

I can provide more specific details later, but right now I have to look at a house or two.

The spin really IS getting atrocious. And this really IS getting ridiculous. I have NEVER had a pdf be anything different, in any way than the original. It is a PRINTER and doesn't change anything. I proof the final PDF before it gets delivered (just because it is easier on my eyes) and I have NEVER had any alteration of any kind. NEVER. It does not move addenda around, it doesn't change fonts, it doesn't make maps and photos disappear - it is an exact duplicate of what I created. And until our State Board says it is ok to mess around with format and convert to who knows what and send out something I did not create - I am not doing it. Period. It is MY license on the line, MY signature, MY report - and it WILL get delivered as I wrote it.

It has nothing to do with resisting technology and EVERYTHING to do with the integrity of my reports.

 

[Fred]

It has nothing to do with resisting technology and EVERYTHING to do with the integrity of my reports.

Something you lose control of as soon as you hit a send button, the same way appraisers lost control handing over paper reports.

 

[Bearslide]

Something you lose control of as soon as you hit a send button, the same way appraisers lost control handing over paper reports.

No arguement there, Mr Santora. I actually caught a MB changing photos and addenda on a hard copy report of mine years ago. I IMMEDIATELY contacted the lender and provided them the TRUE original, as I had created it. I think we all understand that once it leaves our hands, we have no control. But up until that point, it is up to the appraiser to send what they wrote.

While I very much respect you and your opinions, the arguement of what happens after delivery is not my concern. None of us has any control over what happens once you hit "send". It IS my concern that what I send is what I wrote - EXACTLY as I wrote it and not in some altered format. And until our State Board decrees that you may blithely send altered reports with no consequences, that you do not have to produce a TRUE original, that will remain my foremost concern. If lenders so badly want reports in AIReady, they are certainly free to convert them once they have them. I will not do it for them.

 

[McPheeters]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Woolley
would you consider the Alamode-provided warning to be inaccurate? misleading?

Mr. Wiley wrote: "Yes, I do. As I said before, that "warning" was crafted at a time when AlaMode was developing an alternative standard. It was crafted to strike fear, and that's exactly what it has done."




I would consider that a very serious level of mis-representation on the part of Alamode. In fact one so serious as to possibly prompt legal action from FNC against Alamode.....has anyone heard of such action ongoing? By the way, where is FNC's representation in this thread? One would think that with such a serious misrepresentation by Alamode being thrown about, that FNC would have somthing to say....

 

[McPheeters]

No arguement there, Mr Santora. I actually caught a MB changing photos and addenda on a hard copy report of mine years ago. I IMMEDIATELY contacted the lender and provided them the TRUE original, as I had created it. I think we all understand that once it leaves our hands, we have no control. But up until that point, it is up to the appraiser to send what they wrote.

While I very much respect you and your opinions, the arguement of what happens after delivery is not my concern. None of us has any control over what happens once you hit "send". It IS my concern that what I send is what I wrote - EXACTLY as I wrote it and not in some altered format. And until our State Board decrees that you may blithely send altered reports with no consequences, that you do not have to produce a TRUE original, that will remain my foremost concern. If lenders so badly want reports in AIReady, they are certainly free to convert them once they have them. I will not do it for them.

Yet another simple solution.....

 

[woodyva]

"A lender shouldn't be able to MAKE me get a fax machine."

"A lender shouldn't be able to MAKE me use digital photographs"

"A lender shouldn't be able to MAKE me email my reports."
​

Portals centrailze things for lenders and appraisers. With portals neither appraisers nor lenders have to track multiple email addresss. AIReady files are much easier for lenders to review and process than PDF files. That is the simple reason that AIReady is becoming more widespread. Can the reports be "sliced and diced?" Sure, but that capability has been there since the invention of the copy machine and scanning devices.

Lenders cannot make appraisers change. We still have an "old timer" in our area who refuses to email reports. That is his choice, but he then has no right to complain about lenders that won't work with him because he refuses to modernize.

Ok, it is one thing to require that someone fax a report. Faxing does not require that only one system has to be used. Fax machines are for the most part universal. Anyone with a FAX machine can play.

Digital images are universal for the most part as well.

Email does not do anything weird to the files and works universaly for most things.

Webportal delivery works just fine, as long as the portal does not harm or otherwise cause a report to be altered.

The arguement is made that PDF's are not exact copies...I have not seen any problems with my paticular driver. It works as well as my normal printer. It allows my report, exactly as i prepared, on the forms i have chosen to use. Fannie Mae allows me the latitude to communicate my report as I see fit, as long as I use their forms. I am strengthening my scope of work in most regard swhen i choose to use additional forms to help me develop my opinions, and to better communicate my estimate and opinions.

PDF's offer a a standard of file that is relatively easy to use, and allows for virtually anyone to read and receive reports. I have repeatedly stated that I support new technology.

The standard that the AI developed and has partnered with FNC in allowing a licensing agreement for FNC to use it, is a fine standard. That it does not report as FNMA requires the 1004, is a problem. The file produced by OADI is very SIMILAR to a 1004, but in fact i snot. The narrative sections on page one, for example, such as in the improvement section does not allow all of the narrative to be read. It changes the area into a scrolling "window". Fannie has not authorized us to add fields or otherwise augment the structure of the 1004.

I guess my biggest question is this: as FNC surely has a PDF converter, why can they not receive the files and the convert them? This allows complete communication for the appraiser. FNC has open source availability to a la mode, and ACI and teh other packaged software vendors.

Lets leave the vendors aside for a minute. Fannie Mae is turning up the level of reporting that we all do concerning proper market analysis and reporting of declining markets. If I choose to use a worksheet in excel to develop a chart that allows for easy communication of my report, this type of report delivery leaves my due dilligence flying in the wind.

In the event a report was converted from a PDF, the recognized forms would convert and the unknown ones would not. The computers woudl still be able to run QC on the things they already do. We all know that the text in the grids on the 1004 is what is run through the filters. Converting the reports post delivery does not inhibit that process at all. It still aloows my report to reach the desk of the underwriter. This really is a simple issue.

Danny I certainly do not mean any ill towards you, nor do I want anyone to have their opinion of you changed by me. You are a respected and liked member of the AI, so I am doing my best to not sound like I dissrespect you in my my disagreement with you. Both of us are also residents of the south. Something I am very proud of. Neither of us are lawyers, but I would say that state's have the ability to govern how they see fit within their borders. I have the same issues with the HVCC, while it is a great spirit of an idea, no AG of any state has the right to dictate what happens in another state.

Until FNMA says that we have to do all of our reporting on these specific sheets only, that we can only have X number of pictures in a report, that we can only develop our complete scope of work like this....I believe that FNC is wrong. They want to be the solution without even trying to keep up with what forms are being developed by vendors. FNC does not really care about appraisers, they have proven that by not trying to accomodate us by providing a viewer and by refusing to allow us any latitude with additional form options. Since we pay them a fee, I would think that we are a client as well. We are constantly reminded that the client wants this, the client wants that. I am going out on a limb here: I do not believe any lender would willingly and knowingly request a format as limited as what the OADI creates. I would hope that some lenders come with Mr. Olsen to Richmond next month, but I doubt they will. Any lender that does is admitting they are not going to allow the valuation industry the ability to do it's job. How many lenders want that kind of voluntary negative press?

As it stands right now, OADI reports do not allow an appraiser any latitude or ease to properly communicate. USPAP syas we have to report/communicate properly. The OADI, while it steps the QC process forward, sets the preparer back in regards to developing and reporting.

 

[Bearslide]

Well said, Woody - and really what everyone is trying to say.

I don't think anyone here bears Danny any ill will - I don't even know him. My arguement is with the points I have stated and you just spelled out.

I can't speak for other appraisers, and I know there are a few out there who won't move into the technical age. Again, I don't think it is resistance to technology - it is resistance to compromising reports and being a willing party to it.

Kudos, Woody - ya got a rep point for this one.