3.6 Crunch Time

[Non Sequitur]

Back to my “up to 20 3.6 software providers by year end”, here’s one that I’m sure wasn’t on anyone’s bingo card. And I’ll add, they ain’t developing software for indie appraisers to use, so take a guess why they are developing their own 3.6 solution.

 

[Airstream]

Also the scope creep moving away from qualitative to quantitive really started all those revisions. Now you get revisions asking you how you came up with a small adjustment. Markets are not perfect yet the AMC and lenders think they are. If you don't adjust they do the opposite. "Appraiser to make statement why the shed wasn't adjusted for.". This profession will test your patience like no other.

When I see an appraisal and there are $500 to $1000 adjustments, I wonder, “And just how did one get that good?” I don’t even put sheds in the grid unless they are about the size of a garage. But garden sheds? No way. I laugh when my assessor puts a value of $500 on my shed (that isn’t even attached to the ground). Yet he doesn’t even walk into my house!!! I sold real estate for years, and no one ever said, “Oh, hey they have a really nice garden shed!” Buyers look at the big stuff. And that is what appraisers should focus on. I have never seen an MLS data sheet say, “And they have a really nice 10x12 garden shed.” I’ll take a picture of it and mention it, but that’s it.

 

[George Hatch]

I mean what you are doing is simple. I can probably manually do that in 5 minutes. You basically pull up the neighborhood for the year, put in low high median for price and size, and how many sales.

Exactly. Very quick and simple to do, very simple to understand. As I say, a neighborhood analysis is mostly about providing context, how the subject fits into its environment. The market segment analysis comes in at the SC and by definition will be more specific, to whatever extent the quantity of the data will enable.

 

[Non Sequitur]

 

[sister71]

I did not notice any responses from anyone who has completed a 3.6 with ACI software. That is what I thought, since i could not get a report to the finish line and their tech department confirmed the issuses. At this point, ACI: no templates, no carry-forward entries, no auto math calcuations, no working sketch or mapping within the report. Not sure how this constitutes "approved and ready"

So, this has forced a look at SFREP - night and day difference. Templates yes, math calcluations and carry-forward yes, color coded - easy to navigate; took 3 hours to complete a single report that is ready to send to the client - and that 3 hours included trying to "figure things out" being it was the first attempt.

I think ACI has "you-kown-what" the bed. Using the cloud might turn out to be the worst decision they made. Its hard to believe any practicing appraiser had any input in the software design. I'll still give them the opportunity to get-it-together but i'm not liking what I see so far.

Does SFREP have the sketch, maps built in? So it does have the math calculations? ACI is a nightmare 3.6 .I am debating between SFREP or TOTAL

 

[djd09]

idk...but without a general text addendum how do you address USPAP and other off topic issues

 

[DWiley]

idk...but without a general text addendum how do you address USPAP and other off topic issues

Well, if the USPAP issues that are not addressed in the current forms (e.g., prior services) are built into the 3.6 reporting format (and, they are), then no addendum is needed.

 

[djd09]

selective reading ok...other issues...like disclosing and disclaiming i am not a home inspector and such

 

[djd09]

aren't you busy reading other appraisers reports...so much for confidentiality

 

[DWiley]

selective reading ok...other issues...like disclosing and disclaiming i am not a home inspector and such

If one wants to expand on the scope of work, including the nature/degree of inspection, there is a dedicated comment field for that. The first report I looked at this morning has the "I'm not a home inspector comment" in that section of the report.

In general, that is one of the major differences between 2.6 and 3.6 - rather than relying on an unstructured text addendum, comments are placed in the relevant section of the report.