"Quantifiable Market-Derived Methods" for adjustments required by FNMA/USPAP

[J Grant]

Yes, amazingly, it has occurred to us that we rely on software for math!! In that sense, it is a replacement for a calculator. Using software for math is different than using a software program to arrive at adjustments and trends and in some cases, even comp selection.

We see the shift of requiring "support" specified as an illusraiton chart or graph as elevating that over the expeirence of applying other methods in addition to that, exp if it shows a different result.

The trend has been in recent years for the GSEs;s to replace the appraiser in parts of the process (third-party PDC inspections) and to bifurcate the appraiser's portion of the work in a hybrid. The next phase of replacing he appraisr is the concept that a staff anluyist can use the same software the appraiser uses to spit out a chart or graph.

 

[J Grant]

It is not an either/or situation. The land values were wrong because they were not properly supported. He just relied on his "experience" rather than a recognized method

And, you continue to miss the point about the term "experience." Suppose you are appraising a home in a new development. Then, a very short time later you get an assignment for a virtually identical home on a similar site in the same development. It is the data and analyses that you have from that prior assignment that is valuable in the new assignment - not the mere fact that you did it.

That is not correct. It is the EXPERIENCE of having done the prior assignment - not just the data and analysis. If the appraiser did a prior assignment, they saw the property ( well, maybe not anymore with a PDC collection). But many times they see the property, talk with the builder and sales office, interview agents of comps, pore over sales in and outside he development. And it was their prior expeirence from years of appraising other new homes that lest them best evaluate the data on this assignment,

I believe trying to shift the focus onto data is another step toward removing the appraiser, or minimizing their role - experience is not important, geo competency is not important wrt a hybrid can outsource the inspection portion to a person located 200 miles away, the license is not important since a non-licensed PDC collector can gather the onsite "data" .

 

[DWiley]

We see the shift of requiring "support" specified as an illusraiton chart or graph as elevating that over the expeirence of applying other methods in addition to that, exp if it shows a different result.

But there is no such requirement Both GSEs have pointed that out numerous times.

 

[J Grant]

But there is no such requirement Both GSEs have pointed that out numerous times.

Maybe not a GSE requirement, but almost every client now requests it, and the GSE;s are arguing for its use.

 

[Non Sequitur]

But there is no such requirement Both GSEs have pointed that out numerous times.

The GSEs can't un-ring the bell, the graph from hell guidance lives on.

 

[TerryRohrer]

We see the shift of requiring "support" specified as an illusraiton chart or graph as elevating that over the expeirence of applying other methods in addition to that, exp if it shows a different result.

It is amazing that all the invaluable experience being cited does not include an ability to read and comprehend actual requirements that are specified in high school level English.

 

[DWiley]

I believe trying to shift the focus onto data is another step toward removing the appraiser, or minimizing their role - .

Actually, it is just the opposite.

 

[J Grant]

Actually, it is just the opposite.

? How is that an accurate statement, then the GSE policies have eliminated the appraiser entirely in a WAIVER, and reduced their role via PDC third party collections and, cutting the appraisal into segments of outsourced work in a hybrid?/ How does that show the opposite, that GSEs want to retain appraisers?

If the ag appraiser doing res mortgage work sees their income from the combined above drops 50% , its hard to escape the cognitive dissonance.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

But there is no such requirement

Does that keep a reviewer from arguing that such a requirement exists? Isn't that the question the appraiser has?

 

[J Grant]

It is amazing that all the invaluable experience being cited does not include an ability to read and comprehend actual requirements that are specified in high school level English.

AI Overview

Yes, the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (GSEs) require adjustment support in appraisal reports, with new requirements in effect from February 4, 2025. Appraisers must now provide more detailed market analysis, explain and support their adjustments with robust data like paired sales or home price indices, and consider non-linear time adjustments based on a minimum 12-month trend. The goal is to ensure the sales comparison approach and resulting adjustments are well-supported, transparent, and reflect current market conditions accurately.

Clicked on your post, you are the same toxic toad as ever.