Official UCDP XML Validation Tool Required, Part 3

[Tejus]

In part I of this thread, I identified the need for an official UCDP XML validation tool:

http://appraisersforum.com/showthread.php?t=182635

In part II of this thread, I documented the GSE’s have already setup a public test web site for the Loan Delivery XML Test Tool:

http://appraisersforum.com/showthread.php?t=187448

I’ve now discovered that Veros is selling their UCDP XML validation tool to the Appraisal User Community:

http://help.elliemae.com/appraisalcenter/releasenotes/documents/RelNotes_AppraisalCenter_May17.pdf

The GSE’s hired Veros to create the GSE UCDP web portal. This includes the UCDP XML validation tool which Veros is now selling to the Appraisal User Community.

The Veros Quick Check UCDP XML validation tool was developed under the GSE UCDP web portal contract and should be publicly available to the Appraisal User Community at no charge. This is the official GSE UCDP XML validation tool.

Summary:
------------
The entire Appraisal Community requires public access to the official GSE UCDP xml validation tool and test environment. This includes Appraisers, Lenders, AMC’s, Appraisal SW Developers, etc.

The GSEs have already setup a public test web site for the Loan Delivery XML. The GSEs are fully capable of setting up a similar public test web site for the UCDP XML.

The GSEs already have the official UCDP XML validation tool and associated info needed to populate a public UCDP XML test web site.

The GSEs currently refuse to setup a public UCDP XML test web site for the Appraisal User Community.

The GSEs have limited their UCDP support to a small group of privileged vendors selected by the GSEs. This was a backroom deal by the GSEs and the vendors. This has created a huge advantage and monopoly for the privileged vendors. They have screwed the remainder of the Appraisal User Community.

Some GSE supporters have attempted to justify the GSE's backroom deal with the privileged vendors. The GSE supporters claims have been shown to be complete crap. The only GSE supporters have been the privileged vendors selected by the GSEs who benefited from the GSE's backroom deal.

Alfred Pollard, the GSE conservator, has been contacted and requested to require the GSEs to provide a public UCDP XML test environment for the entire Appraisal User Community.

This is a critical issue for the entire Appraisal User Community and must be addressed.

 

[JSmith43]

This is a critical issue for the entire Appraisal User Community and must be addressed.

I'd really like to poll that premise but can't figure out how to craft related questions within the allowed field using the poll function.

 

[Tejus]

I'd really like to poll that premise but can't figure out how to craft related questions within the allowed field using the poll function.

Considering most real estate appraisals are required to pass the UCDP XML validation test or the appraisal is rejected, this is an extremely critical issue for the entire Appraisal User Community.

You might consider asking the Appraisal User Community:

"Are you willing to lose most of your business due to the back room deal and illegal monopoly created by the GSEs and the privileged vendors they selected?"

 

[jtinmichigan]

While I agree that we should have this tool, and even more needed is access to the databases they are creating with our data.

That being said, I rather like being a preferred vendor. No others need apply.

 

[JSmith43]

"Are you willing to lose most of your business due to the back room deal and illegal monopoly created by the GSEs and the privileged vendors they selected?"

Alan, you may have a point, but most appraisers will just go with a vendor that figured out the political moves to get connected. Whatever.

BTW, you haven't used the polling function on this board, I see. The suggested question won't come close to fitting in the allowed question fields.

Guys like George H are shut out of the polling function due to the poll option's "brevity" filter

 

[dbiggers]

Alan, you may have a point, but most appraisers will just go with a vendor that figured out the political moves to get connected. Whatever.

BTW, you haven't used the polling function on this board, I see. The suggested question won't come close to fitting in the allowed question fields.

Guys like George H are shut out of the polling function due to the poll option's "brevity" filter

There are no political connections needed -- you just tell them you're a software vendor and they give you what you need. Ask JD at NCV -- he's commented here already that there's no big conspiracy, as evidenced by the fact that even as a tiny vendor he got everything he needed with no "deal", just like the rest of us.

Alan, you wrote your own software in Excel years ago. Why don't you just make it UAD compatible and submit your own XML like every other vendor? You'd see firsthand that there's no barrier, no back room deal, no skull and bones club.

 

[Tejus]

There are no political connections needed -- you just tell them you're a software vendor and they give you what you need. Ask JD at NCV -- he's commented here already that there's no big conspiracy, as evidenced by the fact that even as a tiny vendor he got everything he needed with no "deal", just like the rest of us.

Alan, you wrote your own software in Excel years ago. Why don't you just make it UAD compatible and submit your own XML like every other vendor? You'd see firsthand that there's no barrier, no back room deal, no skull and bones club.

Dave, you have ignored everything I've posted.

The GSE/UCDP/Veros staff only provide support to their list of privileged sw vendors (which includes you and JD).

The GSE/UCDP/Veros staff refuse to provide support or detailed feedback to the rest of the Appraisal User Community. If I contact the GSE/UCDP/Veros staff, tell them I'm a sw vendor and ask for assistance, their answer is no.

If the GSE's privileged vendors (includes you) had not received the support and ongoing feedback from the GSE's/UCDP/Veros staff, then the privileged vendors (includes you) would have failed. Dave, do you recall that your staff already advertised spending months testing and debugging with the GSE/UCDP/Veros staff? You then claim that this type of GSE support is unnecessary for the rest of the Appraisal User Community.

There is indeed a backroom deal in which the GSEs and the privileged vendors (includes you) agreed providing support to the privileged vendors was sufficient for the entire Appraisal User Community. This has failed, harms the Appraisal User Community, has created a monopoly for the privileged vendors and is illegal.

Dave, when you and the other privileged sw vendors made the backroom deal with the GSE's, you screwed the remaining Appraisal User Community members.

The privileged vendors (including you) do not want the remaining Appraisal User Community members to have access to the GSE support and public test environment. This allows the privileged vendors to maintain their illegal monopoly.

The GSE's are fully capable of providing a free public test environment for the UCDP XML and they have all the pieces necessary to populate the public test environment. A free public UCDP XML test environment would benefit the entire Appraisal User Community and must happen.

This is a critical issue for the entire Appraisal User Community, is not going away and must be addressed by the GSEs.

 

[dbiggers]

Dave, you have ignored everything I've posted.

No, I've read it all. But you're confusing notion that you wrote it with the notion that it's accurate. But your assertions simply aren't.

There's never been any "deal" of any kind, which is why I suggest you test your own paranoid theory by simply declaring yourself to be a software vendor -- which you are -- and then go from there. You'd see there's no secret handshake needed, no money involved, and no "privilege". The only privilege the software vendors get is to be the free tech support for errors or ambiguities in the UAD/UCDP process; if you call that a privilege, then I have some investment property I want to sell you.

I do get a kick out of this thread though. When a day gets rough, I come here, read the thing from beginning to end, and chuckle. It's like a Dilbert strip mixed with the movie "Signs"... always good for a laugh.

 

[jdbiggers]

The only privilege the software vendors get is to be the free tech support for errors or ambiguities in the UAD/UCDP process; if you call that a privilege, then I have some investment property I want to sell you.

You've got that right!!!

I do get a kick out of this thread though. When a day gets rough, I come here, read the thing from beginning to end, and chuckle. It's like a Dilbert strip mixed with the movie "Signs"... always good for a laugh.

I was thinking of another Mel Gibson movie..."Conspiracy Theory."

JD
NCVSoftware

 

[jdbiggers]

This has failed, harms the Appraisal User Community, has created a monopoly for the privileged vendors and is illegal.

Failed? Really?

Seems to me literally millions of appraisals have been successfully submitted through a variety of software, both from us vendors and people smart enough to write their own XML exports (and I know a person doing exactly that!). Maybe not from YOUR Excel macros, but there has in fact been millions of successful submissions of appraisals and I'm pretty sure the few that don't get through immediately eventually do because I doubt they give up on the loan because of a couple of characters in a unicode file.

I can just picture that now. "Sorry Mrs. Smith. We can't do the loan because the appraisal report didn't get through the UCDP portal."

Only one failing is the only person *****ing because they don't want to follow the same published guidelines the rest of us did.

And there ARE FREE public tools to validate ANY XML file against an XSD file. They do not need to make a special one just for UAD. I'd tell you where to find them, but I feel so privileged knowing about them when you don't.

JD
NCVSoftware