Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[DWiley]

I wonder? If I only write two sentences on the neighborhood or others section of my form. Does that go strait to "See Addendum" When converted?

You don't have to wonder - just try it and see what happens.

 

[TJSum]

This is my understanding of the process, it could be wrong, I am sure others will be happy to correct me if that is the case.

If you just write a short comment, you should be fine. The long comments that use up most of that particular comment section are the ones moved to the Addendum because of font, size of type issues, etc.

So areas that need nothing explained stay right on the URAR form. Items out of the norm, that need a lot of detailed explaination, those are the comments moved to page whatever of the Addendum. Seems bass awkwards to me, but based on many replies here there is no problem with important comments gone missing from the URAR to be placed on page whatever of the Addendum... m2:

 

[DWiley]

...that need a lot of detailed explaination, those are the comments moved to page whatever of the Addendum.

If you have a long comment, one that far exceeds the space on the form, what other solution would you propose? 3 pt type?

For most residential appraisals reports our market conditions comments currently average 2 or 3 paragraphs - if they are not on an addendum, where should they be?

 

[TJSum]

Actually my Market Conditions summary takes up close to an entire page, and I have a separate exhibit page set up just for that.

It is all a matter of style, my way of writing reports is to give as much as possible on the URAR, knowing how little attention the average reader gives the addendum portion of any report. If the information is too detailed to fit on the URAR, I still give highlights of the issue on the URAR and then put the complete story in the Addendum. So it is stated in both places, even if the reader did not read the Addendum, they would at least have a shorter summary of the issue at hand. Not just "see addendum" with no hints of why.

The point is not how each of us set up our reports, the point is that each of us should be able to set it up in the fashion we think is best to convey the report. The conversion programs are more limiting than our native software, are an add on cost for the appraiser, and increases the time of creating a report, what is there to like? And this is even before the other concerns are brought to the table.

 

[woodyva]

My suggestion is to simply put abbreviated points in the spaces, then explain where you place them on an addendum if not on page 3. As long as you refernce your jump to an addendum you have done all that you can.
The one thing no software converter does at any level of acceptability is to allow charts to be included. I use trend chart to show salient data sometimes and these are images. Some converters ignor ethem all together, where others place them in a typical picture addendum page. One would go blind trying to read these things. That is why my reports,all of them now, contain a disclaimer that the only true report copy is the one obtained directly from me, in a PDF format. Many can say what they will about a PDF not being a true copy, but it is as close at one will ever get at present time.
To my knowledge I have never found a problem with my software's PDF conversion. I amsure like any system they can be faulty, but at least the theme and style of the report can be communicated.
One question that pops into my mind is the presentations that certain companies are giving to lenders that these converted reports are being "reviewed" by QC applications. It was my understanding that appraisers are to be licensed by state's through the federal standards that allow licensure and certification of appraisers.

 

[DWiley]

One question that pops into my mind is the presentations that certain companies are giving to lenders that these converted reports are being "reviewed" by QC applications. It was my understanding that appraisers are to be licensed by state's through the federal standards that allow licensure and certification of appraisers.

And what do you see as a conflict, Woody? The client is running automated QC reviews using programmed rule sets. The use underwriters to do the same thing now, just not automatically.

 

[DWiley]

The one thing no software converter does at any level of acceptability is to allow charts to be included.

That depends on your form vendor. I have been able to convert reports with charts and graphics into AIReady with no problem.

I have attached a sample of a chart in an AIReady formatted report.

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

Changes (due to this thread?) appear to be happening fast?

 

[DWiley]

Changes (due to this thread?) appear to be happening fast?

If that is a reference to my post, the ability to post charts is not a change. My vendor has long supported this.

 

[Couch Potato]

That is why my reports,all of them now, contain a disclaimer that the only true report copy is the one obtained directly from me, in a PDF format. Many can say what they will about a PDF not being a true copy, but it is as close at one will ever get at present time.

I don't recall any comment claiming a PDF was not a true copy. In fact PDF is the only true copy of my reports IMHO, since only a PDF has my verifiable signature and it is the format I deliver to all my clients. That does not alter the fact that other formats are valid if an appraiser chooses to use them. Nor does it preclude a client from viewing my reports in a different format.