3.6 Crunch Time

[Fernando]

I'm anticipating Fannie will extend 3.6 to next year.
If not, I'll be on vacation and when I get back I'll see the havoc caused to the mortgage industry especially with lenders rush to find appraisers. That is lenders finding low fee appraisers.

 

[Dublin ohio]

I'm anticipating Fannie will extend 3.6 to next year.
If not, I'll be on vacation and when I get back I'll see the havoc caused to the mortgage industry especially with lenders rush to find appraisers. That is lenders finding low fee appraisers.

And if you are not up and running with 3.6 before you go on vacation, when you get back you will have no gse work

 

[glenn walker]

People forget but when 2.6 and
UAD came out many platforms were buggy and appraisers panicking because error codes and lenders calling saying they couldn't upload to the GSE UPDC.

The biggest issue is now appraisers are almost 15 years older and that's changed their ability to adapt and accept change and challenges.

When 2.6 arrived the appraisers over 60 acted like it was the end of the world and some even quit and said F It....lol )

 

[William K]

People forget but when 2.6 and
UAD came out many platforms were buggy and appraisers panicking because error codes and lenders calling saying they couldn't upload to the GSE UPDC.

The biggest issue is now appraisers are almost 15 years older and that's changed their ability to adapt and accept change and challenges.

When 2.6 arrived the appraisers over 60 acted like it was the end of the world and some even quit and said F It....lol )

Since 1985 every form change has had an actual form that you could learn by looking at it and taking it on an inspection/appraisal. You can't do it with the 3.6 because it's intuitive. But, more importantly, since 1985, the "inspection" portion of the appraisal has pretty much stayed the same. This report requires not just additional reporting but also additional information that, in many cases, has never been required. The "inspection" process will change. Terminology has changed; some of it has been completely eliminated, and some of it is all new.
The change to UAD really only changed "Quality" and "Condition" ratings (said goodbye to poor, fair, average, good, excellent, new) and made the ratings more uniform by instituting definitions for each rating. The "inspection" process remained the same as the prior form.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[glenn walker]

Since 1985 every form change has had an actual form that you could learn by looking at it and taking it on an inspection/appraisal. You can't do it with the 3.6 because it's intuitive. But, more importantly, since 1985, the "inspection" portion of the appraisal has pretty much stayed the same. This report requires not just additional reporting but also additional information that, in many cases, has never been required. The "inspection" process will change. Terminology has changed; some of it has been completely eliminated, and some of it is all new.
The change to UAD really only changed "Quality" and "Condition" ratings (said goodbye to poor, fair, average, good, excellent, new) and made the ratings more uniform by instituting definitions for each rating. The "inspection" process remained the same as the prior form.

Just my 2 cents.

Okay but non UAD cells could be filled in much faster then clicking UAD cells and i could fill a old URAR out lightning fast including copy and pasting and using key strokes.

The 2.6 was much slower then original appraisal software and especially uploading and or making changes after it's done.

 

[William K]

Okay but non UAD cells could be filled in much faster then clicking UAD cells and i could fill a old URAR out lightning fast including copy and pasting and using key strokes.

The 2.6 was much slower then original appraisal software and especially uploading and or making changes after it's done.

But software providers developed software to form-fill /import directly from public sources and MLS data into the UAD forms. The "OLD" URAR forms didn't have that because software providers were just trying to develop a software program that could fill out a form report and transmit it. The original URAR was actually being typed by most appraisers at the start of its use.

 

[Fernando]

2.6 UAD still slows me down in putting 0s when their are minor differences. Those changes don't really make the appraisal better. I still think in terms of average, above average, good, above good, and excellent in condition and quality. UAD is so limited in just having C3 for updated conditions. Not all updates are the same especially the more recent trendier upgrades.

 

[William K]

2.6 UAD still slows me down in putting 0s when their are minor differences. Those changes don't really make the appraisal better. I still think in terms of average, above average, good, above good, and excellent in condition and quality. UAD is so limited in just having C3 for updated conditions. Not all updates are the same especially the more recent trendier upgrades.

I don't disagree that "not all updates are the same," but there was never any definition of the subjective terms "average, above average, good, above good, and excellent" that meant different things to different people across the country.
Same as the "superior and inferior" from when I started. We had 3 choices: inferior, superior, and equal, or "+, -, =."

 

[Fernando]

I don't disagree that "not all updates are the same," but there was never any definition of the subjective terms "average, above average, good, above good, and excellent" that meant different things to different people across the country.
Same as the "superior and inferior" from when I started. We had 3 choices: inferior, superior, and equal, or "+, -, =."

What is subjective? C4 is average, C3 is Good, C2 is excellent, and C1 is new. When I look at other appraisers rating, I sometimes don't agree with their C2 when I think it more C3.
Superior and inferior are clearly understood and appraiser can adjust for the differences with the different comps.
Different Fannie rules but appraising still the same.

 

[William K]

What is subjective? C4 is average, C3 is Good, C2 is excellent, and C1 is new. When I look at other appraisers rating, I sometimes don't agree with their C2 when I think it more C3.
Superior and inferior are clearly understood and appraiser can adjust for the differences with the different comps.
Different Fannie rules but appraising still the same.

The terms "poor, fair, average, good, and excellent" were not defined universally (subjective)

UAD defined what C1- C6 meant, same with Q1-Q6.
As an appraiser we may not have liked the particular definition but at least there was one to point to when a borrower or lender said, " but we think it's excellent", we're able to now say ,"no it doesn't meet the Condition rating of C1 because they have lived in it for 2+ years."

"Superior" is not specific enough as a "rating".
Is the property local rich guy "superior", international movie star "superior", or St. Peters Basilica "superior"?

The ratings system gave us Standard definitions.

I personally wish they would have expanded the ratings by adding a + & - for each rating to allow for the range in each rating. But, that's just my opinion.