First encounter with Desktop Underwriter......you want me to what?

[Tru Red]

Had my first encounter with a revision request from a client using Desktop Underwriter yesterday. They suggested 5 additional comparables I did not use....... 23 days after the appraisal report was submitted.
My value of the subject was $240,000. The comps they sent ranged from $190,000 to $330,000. Seriously? (My net and gross adjustments were all under 7% with the comps I used). Their suggestions were mostly higher quality homes, or located next to a river (subject was not), or located in a PUD with HOA fee's. This is a rural location near Yosemite National Park. I spent about 2 hours looking up their comps and effectively responding to their comp suggestions. What a !@#$ing waste of time. And 23 days after it was submitted.

 

[Randolph Kinney]

Just curious, no objections to the value or adjustments or distance for sales used in the appraisal - just comment on these sales.

 

[Tru Red]

Randolph......

Their email states in it's entirety:

"The client has provided the following comparable sales for your review and consideration.
(they sent 5 property addresses with no city or zip code)
If any of these sales are considered reasonable, include them in the market approach and provide additional commentary and changes to the appraisal. If they are not considered in the market approach, provide reasoning and comment why they are not suitable for comparison on a supplemental addendum. If any changes are made to market value as a result of this additional information, please address the reason for the change in your report."

Not a single one they sent was anywhere near as good (comparable) as the ones I used. But I had to spend a couple of hours researching and responding.

 

[CANative]

A couple of hours to vet 5 sales that didn't make sense? That seems like too much time to waste on this.

 

[Tru Red]

I agree. Had to be thorough however....word my response effectively so they don't send it back again.......hopefully. Now perhaps I can utilize a sort of "canned" response if they send useless comps again on future appraisal reports and fine tune it to match the comps they send.

 

[CANative]

Run the data dump produced during the comp search as a spreadsheet. Highlight the sales you included in the adjustment table. Save this spreadsheet and include it in an exhibit addendum.

 

[3 Putt]

Find a copy of the FNMA FAQ's for CU. Send a copy to them and point out the following...

Per FNMA...

"How should lenders use CU?

Fannie Mae does not instruct or suggest to lenders that they ask the appraiser to address all or any of the 20 comparables that are provided by CU for most appraisals."

 

[Caitlyn Stuart]

I agree. Had to be thorough however....word my response effectively so they don't send it back again.......hopefully. Now perhaps I can utilize a sort of "canned" response if they send useless comps again on future appraisal reports and fine tune it to match the comps they send.

Scott -

Can you share your canned comment? I just had one kicked back to me as to why I didn't use certain comps all in the 70k to 75k range. My property is in the 125K range. Geesh! I flipped out on them - let them know that time was money and the time I am wasting on their unwarranted requests was not cost effective. So, I will either raise my fee or not take any more assignments. If they don't trust us they should t be using us.

c

 

[J Grant]

"The sales forwarded by client are found to be not as similar to the subject as the comps on the grid in the appraisal, therefore none of these sales have been added to the appraisal. "

Refer to their data as "sales, " not "comparables".

 

[LordofTexas]

I've said it over and over on how to stop this: Put something similar to these comments at the end of your adjustment comments and edit them per each report:

Search Criteria:

1. A radius of +/-2.0 miles initially from the Subject which was later expanded due to the lack of similar aged Comps
2. Homes initially from 1,800 SF to 2,500 SF (+/-15% smaller and larger than the Subject), but also later expanded.
3. Residential lots only (no lakefront, canal, golf course, etc.)
4. Lot sizes of less than 1 acre but greater than 10,000 square feet (due to market appeal)
5. Homes built from 1953 to 2003 (25 years in both directions)

I haven't had a "comment on this, this, and this Comp not used" request in over 5 years.