ACE Desktops

[Meandering]

The big hangup for me is that somebody else goes to the property, takes photos and prepares a report to be sent to the appraiser. That inspection report and the appraiser's sources of data are used in the desktop report. The appraisers makes their own choices and need to add items to the report. The report itself isn't responsible for compliance, compliance is done by the appraiser

Thank you Joann,

so if I understand this, the appraiser is going to base their EAs and HCs on the inspection report of someone else, and would need to include that someone else in the certification of the "appraisal report"?

Does that software allow for additional narrative for the items required by USPAP like the support discussion for the highest and best use, and the discussion of trends, conditions, restrictions, easements, whether the application of the value definition is being applied as all cash, or financing equivalent to cash, or other creative incentives?

I'm asking because there are far too many people that believe an appraisal report is 3 comps and a bunch of check boxes.

.

 

[Jo Ann Meyer Stratton]

The appraiser has be a member of the local MLS and under that membership they can do a search for comparables just like you do for a 1004/70. That specific search is then downloaded to the CC/ACE program. All the information that is in that MLS is then in the data base for that specific order for an ACE product report. Then while working in the ACE program the appraiser chooses three appropriate closed and three active. Then the appraiser makes adjustments either based on the regression analysis within the program or ones that the appraiser has developed for their 1004/70 reports. Photos of subject and comparables are from MLS or a special program Bradford developed using street photos by Google or something similar. Everything in the report is the appraiser's choices. The program then develops charts and graphs based on the appraiser's data.

 

[Jo Ann Meyer Stratton]

Marian-I was thinking and posting my thoughts while you posted the question. In Comp Cruncher there was spaces for appraiser's comments to describe the market area of the subject, the subject and comparables. The ACE report also has spaces for comments, it might be short spaces but comments can be made. It is the appraiser that makes the report USPAP complient, not the form. The appraiser is also responsible to have the report be as accurate and informative as possible.

One danger with this type of report some appraisers are so used to filling in the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac forms without any additional thought, verification, research, etc that they will just blindly accept all the computerized data and let the computer make choices. That is not the correct way regardless if it is a 1004/70 or an ACE.

The first few reports will take hours to complete but as an appraiser becomes more comfortable with the process it will gradually become quicker and easier (if you are in a metropolitan area with many, many competing properties). The Skippies will do them for the $75 and the reports will not have much profession thought behind the report. A professional appraiser should charge the higher fee that will reflect the actual time and effort put into the report.

 

[JSmith43]

The problem will be that even if a few smarty pants can figure out how to make a sufficient return while creating a USPAP compliant report & compliant files, there are so many appraisers out there with a default position that the work product is not going to be compliant.

Have fun with the arrows, pioneers. This will be similar to British Regulars marching in perfect form into patriot ambushes near Concord & then near Lexington. Many of you will survive, but eventually have to get on a boat & get the heck out of the area

 

[Roy Courtney]

Every AMC and software company seems to have a gimmick to earn more money off of the efforts of the pitiful appraiser. Sure it is U-sap compliant!!! Here comes a sap, uh, appraiser now!

 

[3 Putt]

so if I understand this, the appraiser is going to base their EAs and HCs on the inspection report of someone else, and would need to include that someone else in the certification of the "appraisal report"?

This is a good question and I have done a good bit of homework on this topic.

Where is the line in the sand for who must be named for participating in the gathering of information and preparation of the report?

Do I need to find out who typed the data into the computer system at the local auditors office? I am relying on their input. What about the local realtor's office? Do I trust that the agents assistant correctly input the information? Should I name them?

From what I have amassed, it is based upon the participation in the valuation process. The office assistant who looked up information, does not need to be named. However, if your contribution and participation is significant and you share in determining the value, you must be named.

 

[J Grant]

Disclose that a non appraiser person was engaged by client to photograph subject and that exterior photo, along with overhead plats, MLS interior photos were relied on.

I would have less problems with that, then the preprogrammed, auto software developed adjustments and other information generated by the software. It seems that in order to get report out in a timely manner, one would use them, but if one does that, then as an appraiser, how do you know those adjustments are equivalent to market reaction and the ones you would develop? Also to get report out in a timely manner, likely would have to skip phone calls and a certain amount of verifying. So as an appraiser, are you comfortable with that? That would bother me more than relying on an outside person to take the photo.

This is the problem with these types of products and scenarios. A software company comes out with a product supposedly to make life easier and faster so shorter time reports could be generated quicker..(and said software company will make a fortune if idea takes off). Meanwhile, the appraiser has a choice to make...rely on the software auto functions of adjustments etc and pump out their reports and make money (but be unable to defend them later, as who the heck knows if the adjustment's really reflect market reaction, or if the MLS sf was correct). Or, the choice is be slow, take more time, develop adjustments to check the auto adjustments, check the MLS info dropped in for correctness. Now, the report is taking twice as long, and that $75 fee suddenly is deficient.

And thus it is easy to blame appraisers for not being "open" to change or new formats etc...we are plenty open and willing, but pay us enough and allow enough time to get credible results. And that might mean $150, not $75. THAT could easily be done if software designers and middlemen did not take over half the fee for themselves. It could mean allowing 2 days turn time, not 1 day. So, if clients refuse to take their hand out of the profit jar of fees and listen to appraisers for that small difference in turn time, why are appraisers to blame for not "adapting to change?"

Actually, there is no change....just a continuation of fee skimming and pressure for unreasonable turn time in a different format.