How do You Handle Revision Requests that aren't Necessary?

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Our own standards indicate that report content should meet users' needs. As a reviewer, I should not need to know anything about the appraiser's software and how it works.

Some could certainly benefit from a basic writing course. I have seen countless legal page text addendum without a single paragraph break, header or any formatting designed to make it actually readable. Perhaps the penalty for such behavior should be 7 hours of reading reports done by others who write the same way


Data from the usability tests show that the new UAD output is much easier to read, and that is due in large part to it doing some of the very things you suggested.

Do reviewers review the PDF version of an appraisal?

 

[DWiley]

Do reviewers review the PDF version of an appraisal?

That varies.

Some systems run primarily off the XML. Those can be very nice as a reviewer because, for example, if the report contains more than 3 comps they can all be shown on a combined adjustment grid - which is much easier than flipping back and forth. Of course, the PDF is also available in a reading pane.

Some companies with less resources do use only the PDFs and "stare and compare" methodology.

Regardless of which the use (PDF or XML), most use some combination of automation and human action.

 

[glenn walker]

Do reviewers review the PDF version of an appraisal?

Yes last time I checked-- I cant read or speak XML LOL

 

[sputnam]

So many appraisals have WALLS OF TEXT in the addendum section. Just irrelevant crap that is already explained in the limiting conditions of the form. Stop it.

Anyone using all-caps, please realize that everyone thinks you're an idiot.

I agree 100%. Too many appraisers just throw everything they can think of onto their templates. A lot of times, I find comments that absolutely nothing to do with the subject property. And, BTW.... stop with the multi paragraph Highest and Best Use statement on residential reports. Most of the time, it takes one sentence to meet USPAP requirements.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Our own standards indicate that report content should meet users' needs. As a reviewer, I should not need to know anything about the appraiser's software and how it works.

Some could certainly benefit from a basic writing course. I have seen countless legal page text addendum without a single paragraph break, header or any formatting designed to make it actually readable. Perhaps the penalty for such behavior should be 7 hours of reading reports done by others who write the same way


Data from the usability tests show that the new UAD output is much easier to read, and that is due in large part to it doing some of the very things you suggested.

Regarding DW's comment about "...countless legal page text addendum without a single paragraph break, header...."

The UAD "Condition of the property..." dialogue box warrants reliance on a font so small that aging eyes have to strain to follow what the user is typing; and the section doesn't seem to allow paragraphs, spacing, bullets, etc., etc. [Noting that few if any of the ACI Dialogue boxes are large enough to be functional, although they could theoretically be enlarged to match the entire image page, and then shrink themselves when the user has completed his or her comments/narrative.]

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Yes last time I checked-- I cant read or speak XML LOL

Hard to believe that you can't read or speak XML if you were able to read music earlier in your life... I took piano lessons seriously for a year, about 4 years ago; and after one solid year I was ALMOST able to play Jingle Bells....

 

[JeffSH]

I agree 100%. Too many appraisers just throw everything they can think of onto their templates. A lot of times, I find comments that absolutely nothing to do with the subject property. And, BTW.... stop with the multi paragraph Highest and Best Use statement on residential reports. Most of the time, it takes one sentence to meet USPAP requirements.

I just had a reviewer force me to put my HBU analysis in the additional comments section. I guess it's a lender requirement? "Given the single family zoning and condition of the improvements, the current use (single family residential) is the highest and best use." That's all I use. Fits in the space after the checkbox.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

Regarding DW's comment about "...countless legal page text addendum without a single paragraph break, header...."

The UAD "Condition of the property..." dialogue box warrants reliance on a font so small that aging eyes have to strain to follow what the user is typing; and the section doesn't seem to allow paragraphs, spacing, bullets, etc., etc. [Noting that few if any of the ACI Dialogue boxes are large enough to be functional, although they could theoretically be enlarged to match the entire image page, and then shrink themselves when the user has completed his or her comments/narrative.]

My point about different types of appraisal software pertains to the confusing job it must be to look for a specific type of data when the information is reported in different formats depending upon the appraisal software.

 

[ZZGAMAZZ]

I just had a reviewer force me to put my HBU analysis in the additional comments section. I guess it's a lender requirement? "Given the single family zoning and condition of the improvements, the current use (single family residential) is the highest and best use." That's all I use. Fits in the space after the checkbox.

Curious: Where else would you report results of your HBU analysis, other than in the additional HBU coments section that spills-over into the narrative addendum.

 

[JeffSH]

Curious: Where else would you report results of your HBU analysis, other than in the additional HBU coments section that spills-over into the narrative addendum.

After the question it says 'if no, describe' I put my analysis there even though I answered yes. It only spills over to the additional comments when the zoning is atypical.