CU Warnings (i.e. Fnm0614 )

[Noreen]

By the way, the lender's condition was not proper in my opinion. They are supposed to use CU to help inform the underwriter about potential appraisal issues and not forward the CU message to the appraiser for comment. How in the heck would you know why the your adjustments do not agree with peer and model adjustments? The proper way to condition this file would have been to ask you to provide an additional comp that is similar in condition to the subject property that supports value and/or to provide additional support for your condition adjustments

Spot On Tim, my response is to this statement ( maybe three times since this all started ) " This appraiser cannot speak to how another appraiser thinks, this appraiser considered...blah, blah, blah".

 

[BRCJR]

I always wonder why an Appraiser did not use the "substituted" comparable property to begin with, if it is considered a better comp than the one used.
How do these comps magically appear to make a request go away?

 

[Eli]

By the way, the lender's condition was not proper in my opinion. They are supposed to use CU to help inform the underwriter about potential appraisal issues and not forward the CU message to the appraiser for comment. How in the heck would you know why the your adjustments do not agree with peer and model adjustments? The proper way to condition this file would have been to ask you to provide an additional comp that is similar in condition to the subject property that supports value and/or to provide additional support for your condition adjustments

Yes, or additional methodology and reasoning. Reconciliation basically. But that CU is not likely to pick up on the general text yet anyway.

Have you ever wrote a self contained report?

 

[timd354]

Have you ever wrote a self contained report?

Yes, but not for lending related purposes

 

[Eli]

By the way, the lender's condition was not proper in my opinion. They are supposed to use CU to help inform the underwriter about potential appraisal issues and not forward the CU message to the appraiser for comment. How in the heck would you know why the your adjustments do not agree with peer and model adjustments? The proper way to condition this file would have been to ask you to provide an additional comp that is similar in condition to the subject property that supports value and/or to provide additional support for your condition adjustments

Yes, or additional methodology and reasoning. Reconciliation basically.

Yes, but not for lending related purposes

I have

 

[Eli]

You can go as deep as you want on the lender related purpose and relate it to public trust. I will set back and enjoy.

 

[timd354]

aww come on tim....

There are many very sharp underwriters out there. Of course, not unlike appraisers, there are some underwriters who a real dolts.

 

[Eli]

There are many very sharp underwriters out there. Of course, not unlike appraisers, there are some underwriters who a real dolts.

Let's get back to this lender purpose and public trust. Awe, come on Tim.

 

[Eli]

I need some entertainment.

 

[Deleted member 80407]

Hello Appraiser Forum members,

I received a message today from my client regarding the lender inquiring about: FNM0614 (The condition adjustment is smaller than peer and model adjustments.) with three of my comps that had a condition adjustment. Does anyone have any good knowledge on this? I am to comment and address. I noticed that the subject had shabby carpet that was discolored which was what the condition adjustment warranted. I am unsure how to address this CU "The condition adjustment is smaller than peer and model adjustments" verbiage. Is there anyone who knows about how to handle this CU software that is tagging my conditions adjustment as a high risk when I am being honest about the subject's carpet condition (3 comps were identified with this CU message)?

Looking forward to hearing what I can do to let the lender know in a professional way that the condition adjustments are warranted regardless of their CU automatic risk detector.

Thank you!

JAM

Try putting this verbiage in your reports:

The UAD is not flexible and employs a "best fit methodology" (from limited choices) as opposed to user defined terms. In some cases, the appraiser's rating from the UAD list may conflict with another's opinion of the same attribute. If required, the appraiser completed the report to comply with the UAD while considering the observed characteristics of the subject and comparables and factored those into the value reconciliation. The appraiser attempted to obtain an adequate amount of information in the normal course of business regarding the subject and comparable properties.