Appraisal On Form 1004 For 'individual Client'

[Peter LeQuire]

I don't believe you need descriptors like Q & C. The only reason FNMA uses them is to use against us and to steal our information to create their own data system bank...nothing more. We should just adjust if they are superior or inferior to the subject ...that's what we are appraising...and our commentary should show how that particular adjustment is warranted and supported. Far easier for the private work to understand and less likely to confuse and/or mislead. There is not even a weak argument to support using GSE Q&C ratings. It doesn't matter that this house is a q4 and the comp is a Q3....much less insulting is that the comp has brick exterior and marble flooring which the market pays more for, thus adjusted at that contributory value.

Maybe we don't need descriptors like those required by UAD, but, like the requirement for appraisers to actually inspect the comps when they say they do and their work clearly reflects that they did not; when appraisers' summaries of their work is some variation on "I'm the appraiser, that's why."; and when appraisers sign reports saying they inspected properties when they haven't and prepared the report when they didn't, it seems to me they've brought the UAD requirements on themselves. When appraisers use of "Average" allows them to get away with not making an effort to learn and understand differences in property attributes, the requirement to use reasonably objective descriptors is more than reasonable. Paybacks are hell, and all of us doing GSE work suffer the penalties inflicted because of those who played fast and loose with certifications and their compliance with guidelines.

As to Fanny "punishing" appraisers - maybe they use the UAD descriptors to do so, maybe not. But I wonder how much information Fanny gleans from an appraiser's report belongs to the appraiser in the first place. Does information she copies verbatim from a listing brief "belong" to her? Do records of a government office "belong" to an appraiser simply because he copied it from a deed or property card? Maybe portions of an appraiser's report may be "stolen" by Fanny in some obtuse sense, but I'd think that, once our reports are handed over to a client, that client "owns" that report, and its content absent contractual agreement otherwise. I put language in each of my reports that the client can't release the report or portions of it without my written consent which is about as enforceable as my claim to a possessory interest in The Biltmore because I use one of its restrooms when I visited it.

There is absolutely nothing in the UAD descriptors (or ANY ratings, M&S among them) that prevents an appraiser from explaining her conclusion about the quality or condition ratings used for the subject and the comparables so that any person getting a copy of an appraisal has a chance to understand the basis for asserting value-rated differences between them. It's simply - IMO - more objective to use such or similar ratings rather than those amazingly fluid "ratings" "average" or "superior" or "inferior".

As the sage sayeth - "That's my opinion, feel free to make it your own."

 

[residentialguy]

UAD descriptive do not make it any more objective. It does prevent them from using that data for their own appraisals program. And until you showeth otherwise, that's my opinion that is supported.