Give me a break

[Overimprovement]

A model prediction of a condition unseen by anyone can self fulfill as "accurate"? How is it proven unless each of those houses were to be inspected inside and out to check the data assigned condition from the model against what an inspection shows and appraiser concludes? If the user's agenda is outcome accepted of a model thus they find results acceptable, there is no breaking of a circular argument.

DW mentioned that paired data is available when a waiver is granted, but then the borrower decides to get a full appraisal anyway.

 

[Overimprovement]

No one is claiming that the model is perfect. But the humans aren’t perfect either. I have seen gutted homes that were reported to be C4 or C3 (as is) by humans as well. It is impossible to eliminate all risk.

I agree with others that in this (hopefully) small subset of examples, the appraiser should be either given a warning, or if flagrant to 'hit a price', submitted to the state, or at least put on the no no list.

To the GSE's in general, I offer this observation. As a general population, appraisers are of above average intelligence. I said as a general population. Now if there continues to be such confusion by so many on the true meanings of condition and quality, could it be the teacher, and not the student?

I find UAD to be extremely vague related to Q and C. It is also lacking greatly in granularity. Q4 and C3 cover such a large swath of homes in my market they are essentially useless. How about 50 examples of houses, with pictures, of what Fannie considers representative of each category? How about a comprehensive Fannie-sponsored CE course? Perhaps feedback could be given as well when a report-specified Q or C rating differs from what Fannie would call it. Not the 'gotcha letter', but some constructive feedback? Just some risk-mitigation ideas. I am certain Fannie wants their reports as strong as possible.

 

[djd09]

In the example you sighted it appears that the appraiser needed to classify the subject as C3 in order to use comps that would allow him/her to hit the sale price. If that is the case it is either neglect, stupidity or fraud and should not be tolerated. Turning someone into their State Board should not be taken lightly and should be reserved for only the most obvious cases of lying or fraud, but in the case you sight it might very well be worth it. The sooner we as a profession weed out the incompetent the sooner we will gain the level of respect that some many on this forum claim they want.

i am not a lawyer, but in some cases it could be considered wire fraud.

what is also interesting is how the lender was not mentioned in DW example.

per the gse own lender letter, the lender is responsible for the quality of the appraisal. see below

Lenders’ responsibilities for appraisal review

Importantly, the lender remains responsible for:
the description of the subject property,
ensuring the subject property meets property eligibility requirements, and
the accuracy and completeness of all data on the appraisal that pertains to the property and project (if applicable), other than the appraised value. This includes the subject property’s condition and quality ratings (Selling GuideB4-1.3-06, Property Condition and Quality of Construction of the Improvements).

Inaccurate reporting of subject property characteristics including the condition or quality of the subject can invalidate the lender’s relief from representations and warranties on property value.

https://singlefamily.fanniemae.com/media/24766/display

 

[J Grant]

DW mentioned that paired data is available when a waiver is granted, but then the borrower decides to get a full appraisal anyway.

Part of the paired data from what I understand is a fairly recent ( within 3 years?) prior appraisal. Of course a house condition and upgrades or deferred maintenance can change in 3 years.

All this phony concern from the agencies about "risk" - if they really wanted to reduce risk .ensure the properties that serve as collateral remain credit worthy for X years duration of a loan, they could require a home inspection on every loan by a licensed home inspector ,and/or establish $ fund in escrow /avail low interest rates loans earmarked for repairs and upgrades. The problem is many people can qualify for purchase, but as the years go by and taxes, insurance, costs rise and house components age or break, needed costly repairs start piling up the owner runs out of $ for upkeep and the house starts losing value.

 

[Zoe]

Well, when a report says a property is in C3 condition, but it contains photos showing a bad roof, collapsing ceiling, carpets with bare spots, etc etc, I would submit I really do not need someone else to go look at the property. We are not playing a game of gotcha over C3 vs C4, we are looking for serious errors that affect our risk

Okay, that still don't make sense. How are you getting this conflicting info and how are you accepting the appraisals from these appraisers? The same way GSE's accept fraudulent paper work from lenders?

 

[Zoe]

Step B. How do you handle an appraiser and lender if they send you fraudulent paper work or an appraisal with

Well, when a report says a property is in C3 condition, but it contains photos showing a bad roof, collapsing ceiling, carpets with bare spots, etc etc, I would submit I really do not need someone else to go look at the property. We are not playing a game of gotcha over C3 vs C4, we are looking for serious errors that affect our risk

Okay, Step B. How do you handle a lender that sends you fraudulent paperwork.

Question 2. How do you handle an appraiser that sends you a report as you explain?

Okay Danny, you are not going to get a better condition rating that you will get from appraisers for the most part. Appraisers will beat anybody as a group on a condition rating. Or are you saying they are still being pressured by GSE's and lenders?

 

[DWiley]

Part of the paired data from what I understand is a fairly recent ( within 3 years?) prior appraisal. Of course a house condition and upgrades or deferred maintenance can change in 3 years.

No, that is not what I am talking about. I referred to instances where a waiver was offered but not accepted. That happens more often than most would think. In such a case we have the data on the valuation the AVM provided and the model projected condition. We get that prior to the appraisal that is then performed a few days later, and we can compare the results. Not sure how we could get better comparative data.

 

[DWiley]

I find UAD to be extremely vague related to Q and C. It is also lacking greatly in granularity. Q4 and C3 cover such a large swath of homes in my market they are essentially useless. How about 50 examples of houses, with pictures, of what Fannie considers representative of each category? How about a comprehensive Fannie-sponsored CE course? Perhaps feedback could be given as well when a report-specified Q or C rating differs from what Fannie would call it. Not the 'gotcha letter', but some constructive feedback? Just some risk-mitigation ideas. I am certain Fannie wants their reports as strong as possible.

Those ratings are being revised in the new UAD, and I am quite sure the education on the new UAD will have significant content devoted to this topic

 

[Zoe]

No, that is not what I am talking about. I referred to instances where a waiver was offered but not accepted. That happens more often than most would think. In such a case we have the data on the valuation the AVM provided and the model projected condition. We get that prior to the appraisal that is then performed a few days later, and we can compare the results. Not sure how we could get better comparative data.

Again, do you take any action against lender or appraiser? What are your steps after that? I will tell how your explanation comes across. It comes across as you like your AVM better than an appraiser.

You are an appraiser. Strange.

 

[Zoe]

I don't get it Danny. Things don't ryhme.