Collateral Underwriting Appraisal Messages

[Yellow Fin]

All you can do is explain your reasoning, for the rating you chose.
Maybe fannie will be sending letters for all the appraisals of that property within the past year.

You might be answering "how come" questions for various appraisals for a year or more.

This will be a disaster if it happens. It is worse than 'how come you didn't choose all other properties in past 12 months as a comparable? why? why not?'

 

[Meandering]

Send them your advatar pic. Tell them you're out double checking yourself right now and am providing the pic as evidence.

 

[Yellow Fin]

Marion, you have a very good sense of humor.

 

[Evincere]

I asked to provide the details of other appraisers' ratings/opinions. .

Good response. I doubt they have any such information. I suspect at this stage of CU development such "details" are not available to the Lender (unless they had possession of the actual report and supplemental addenda). I suspect the CU data is documented in some aggregated format that just spits out a history of a properties rating for the Lender.

 

[KenAZ]

I have an insider friend at an AMC that told me an appraisal got a warning that "The net adjustment of a comparable is not consistent with the net adjustment from other appraisals."

 

[Craig in Oregon]

Post #55 above -- this can't be serious, but it is believable -- my response: Huh? And why exactly should it be?
The trend in this thread emerging may be "answer a question with a question" -- as in "my report differs from others? Of course, why shouldn't it, only in the aggravating aggregated CU program can one see consistently erroneous results EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME"

Fannie is asking for a real work slowdown and maybe a stoppage until this gets figured out by all involved; a week to a month or so sound like enough?
JMHO. And the lenders especially mortage brokers/bankers as I said in prior post a month or so ago are liking this CU (Crap Unlimited)
even less than appraisers are.

 

[Conni Scott]

Here was my first CU condition, I received it before the 24th as the AMC wanted to get a jump start on all the fun.
1) The location rating for comparable 3 is materially different than what has been reported by other appraisers. Please provide commentary.

Appraiser response:
1) Comp 3 is located on a feeder road directly off a main road with traffic leading into neighborhood similar to subject property. Aslo located at "T" intersection of Maine Dr. It is this appraisers opinion that this has some market influence to typical buyers and was therefore given an adverse location rating.

Haven't heard another word from this client. Then I get this email first thing this morning from different AMC.
1) The view ratings for comparable #1 and #3 are materially different than what has been reported by other appraisers. Appraiser to verify OR comment.

I know my view ratings are correct, but haven't sent over revised report with comments yet, needed a cooling off period so as not to say what I really wanted to say. If they have to wait until the last minute of the day then maybe they won't be so quick to send me this crap. I clearly stated in report that these comps were superior in partial bay view as subject has woods view only. What more should I say??

 

[Highlander416]

Post #55 above -- this can't be serious, but it is believable -- my response: Huh? And why exactly should it be?
The trend in this thread emerging may be "answer a question with a question" -- as in "my report differs from others? Of course, why shouldn't it, only in the aggravating aggregated CU program can one see consistently erroneous results EVERYWHERE, ALL THE TIME"

Fannie is asking for a real work slowdown and maybe a stoppage until this gets figured out by all involved; a week to a month or so sound like enough?
JMHO. And the lenders especially mortage brokers/bankers as I said in prior post a month or so ago are liking this CU (Crap Unlimited)
even less than appraisers are.

All the worry is probably about nothing. That said, I am more concerned with how underwriting will use this information than the CU itself. I have read several opinions that point out appraisers will notice very little change. It is this view that seems a little pie in the sky to me. My gut tells me that many, if not even most, underwriters will simply copy and paste the full CU punch list and send it right over to the appraiser for comment. I hope that I am wrong and probably am, but my instincts tell me that is the most probable reaction.

I think CU is a pretty remarkable program. My belief is that Fannie Mae does not fully understand the current appraiser/client relationship that often exists today, particularly when an AMC is involved. To say it is adversarial in many cases is an understatement. We see it on the forum all the time.

 

[Meandering]

I have an insider friend at an AMC that told me an appraisal got a warning that "The net adjustment of a comparable is not consistent with the net adjustment from other appraisals."

I like this one.

So that property will ride through every appraisal with the same net adjustment? Dang! What happens when the subject's are different and differ in GLA? What happens when it is the subject? Sorry Mr. Homeowner, I already know your property has a net adjustment of 12%, so there's your appraisal and your sign.

The location rating for comparable 3 is materially different than what has been reported by other appraisers.
Comment: Some appraiser use N/Res for everything. I on the other hand have opted to tell you the truth.

The view ratings for comparable #1 and #3 are materially different than what has been reported by other appraisers. Appraiser to verify OR comment.
Comment: Please provide the differing appraisals so that I can verify and comment that they did not chose the view rating based on compatibility with a subject, where as I have opted to follow the fannie definitions for view.

 

[Evincere]

I
I know my view ratings are correct, but haven't sent over revised report with comments yet, needed a cooling off period so as not to say what I really wanted to say. If they have to wait until the last minute of the day then maybe they won't be so quick to send me this crap. I clearly stated in report that these comps were superior in partial bay view as subject has woods view only. What more should I say??

The CU tool does not read any of the commentary by the appraiser, which can be key to understanding comp selection, adjustments, and the final value. Actually, commentary is critical especially to atypical or rural properties.

And the AMCs can be nothing more than carrier pigeons relaying the Lenders CU review findings too and fro as they do now.

Bottom line is that Fannie CU isn't (capable) of reading what may be some of the most important data relevant to the reconciliation, and until they find a way to accomplish this they will just be spewing hard stop flags, guaranteeing processing delays, aggravating the hell out of all parties concerned.

But yes, they have accomplished something great that investors will love. They've have built a self satisfying edifice of aggregated data to themselves ..which at the moment amounts to a grandiose AVM.

The irony is that in some ways the birth defeats the purpose of the creation. Cannot read or comprehend commentary?? Reminds me of an automaton Frankenstein without a brain.