2055 for proposed construction?

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Fred,

Yikes!!! Lot's of questions. Here's my takeopinion on the matter.

First read this post by Rstrahan

http://appraisersforum.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1489

That will take care of most of your concerns or maybe even confuse you some more. Nothing seems to be clear on the appraisers end of things. This stuff is all written to benefit the banks/lenders.

So 1) No, it is not a federally related transaction because the loan is underwritten to FNMA guidelines and can be sold to FNMA, even if they hold it in portfolio and never sell it.

2) A mortgage broker is not a depository institution under FDIC, OTS,OTC,
etc so it is not an FRT. And if the loan was going to a regulated institution, then it would have to be prepared in their name, not the brokers, which would alert you to that fact. Once again, the loan conforms to FNMA guidelines so as in 1 above, it's not an FRT

3) An AMC is not a depository institution plus you stated the loan would conform to FNMA guidelines again, so even if the AMC's client is a regulated depository institution, it's not an FRT.

4)Is a strange one. I would assume that you are refering to a narrative residential appraisal?. Maybe a jumbo loan over FNMA limits? If it's a narrative and not eligible for sale to FNMA, then it would be under the agencies guidelines and it would be an FRT and you would have to complete an "as-is" value as per Statement 10 in USPAP.

All of this can be solved by a proper engagement letter from the client as to what they require or a review of the regulated institution's appraisal guidelines but too often in the residential field, we fail to get them.

I hope I helped somewhat and I would appreciate your additional input on my interpretations of your questions.

Ben

 

[Blue1]

Ben,

Are you sure that if Fannie Mae wants you to depart from USPAP that it's always wise to do so? Look, you're gonna be liable no matter what. You could be liable for misleading a client by not using the proper reporting option.

I agree with not wanting to accept increased liablity. That makes good sense. Besides your example, I've never heard of any one else getting "gripped" because of a depreciation estimate.

My good clients all know that I will do mainly 1004 forms for ALL appraisals and I have more work than I can handle.

I agree.....the easy work is gone. Well......more complex work demands higher fees.......Who else is gonna do it?

Like I said, I agree, don't accept liability when you don't have to....just be careful and know when you're omitting important information. FNMA won't be in court to testify for you.

 

[Ben Vukicevich SRA]

Blue

I'm not going to be liable because the departure provision has been properly invoked by mutual agreement with the client in Items 8 and 9 on the cert, thus eliminating the Cost Approach. They have agreed to the reporting option via their stupid DTU computer.

And if FNMA doesn't want the Cost Approach, do you think they are going to turn you in to the state board if the loan goes bad? Nah. They'd look kind of dumb, wouldn't you say????

Go with the flow. Those URAR's aren't going to be here forever....as more and more loans are underwritten by the computer..

Ben

 

[bobburnitt]

Fannie Mae approved the form, for Pete's sake. At the bottom of the page the sales analysis is on it gives you the option of choosing "subject to completion per plans and specs." Then below that you see the fine print "Fannie Mae form 2055."

BB in Texas

 

[Paulette in Texas]

Think this through. ALL proposed construction whether 2055 interior or 1004 require you to inspect the "site." Whether the house is there or not is not the question. YOU inspected the site, even if it mean stomping through 5 acres of mud to the back to inspect what was there...that's an interior and "subject to" plans & specs. 2055 or 1004, just document your own files and bill, bill, bill for the time and effort. As for me & mine, 2055 no problem, cause we're gonna document everything, just a shorter form. Same money and better on us. I like 'um. Good luck, Paulette in Tx
Rotts rule and Shih tzus fine...go w...

 

[bobburnitt]

Right on Paulette,

BB in Texas