interflood has bad data!

[Markgreen]

I know there is some misleading advertising going around regarding our product, Flood Insights. I am writing this to help clarify exactly what Flood Insights uses so you can be comfortable in its use. I know it is rather long, so don't read this if you are tired!!

Flood Insights consist of three primary parts: the street layer, which TFHC (Transamerica Flood Hazard Certification) purchases from MapInfo®, the flood layer, which TFHC has developed (FloodMap®), and the actual address geocoded database, also from MapInfo. Some of the files used by TFHC for Floodmap started out as FEMA Q3 files, but TFHC has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on creating, updating and enhancing the FloodMap product beyond the capabilities and accuracy of Q3. In addition, TFHC has hundreds of maps that are not even available from FEMA electronically.

Q3 data is not something that may be used by itself. The Q3 file is actually a set of coordinates that represents flood zones. You must have GIS mapping software that allows you to overlay these coordinates so that the flood zones are visually represented. There is no such thing as a Q3 map, however, there could be a map that uses only Q3 files (not the case with Flood Insights).

TFHC has taken this Q3 data, ENHANCED it, integrated it with the MapInfo maps, and built an application around all this that allows the user to see the map with the flood zones, called Flood Insights. Flood Insights is updated each month with current map data.

TFHC subscribes to the FEMA service that provides notifications for all flood zone changes. TFHC receives these notices, generally in letter form, one example is, Letter of Map Revision - LOMR). Each time TFHC receives such a notice, it changes the electronic flood layer (Floodmap) to reflect the new changes (no longer a Q3 file because of these many enhancements).

In 2000, and 2001, there were approximately 5,412 and 4,768 new maps issued by FEMA. Floodmap and the FEMA paper maps would reflect these changes, Q3 files from FEMA would not.

In 2000 and 2001, there were approximately 1,593 and 2,155 non-printed map changes (we know this because of the letter notification) that were incorporated into Floodmap and are not available from FEMA as a Q3 file, or a FEMA paper map, Floodmap (Flood Insights) has these enhancements.

In addition, TFHC has taken hundreds of the FEMA paper maps and converted them to a digital file, which is used in Floodmap. We have many more counties available with our Floodmap product than FEMA does with their Q3 files, and these counties have been maintained by TFHC. In the cases where FEMA has made a mistake (or too loose of tolerence) in a Q3 file, or paper map, TFHC has corrected the error and reflected this correction in Floodmap.

Because of these enhancements (at considerable cost), Floodmap (Flood Insights) is not, and should not be considered a Q3 map.

TFHC takes the flood data very serious, it is not just a nice add on, flood data is our main business. We think we have a great product in Flood Insights because of it's accurate flood zones and very fast easy to use interface. For anyone who wants to try it, go to our site www.floodinsights.com and try the free trial. You be the judge! Questions, give me a call or respond to this post.

Thanks,
Mark Green
National Sales Manager
Transamerica Flood Hazard Certification
Direct Phone: 440-582-9750
Flood Insights:1-800-932-1018



[/b]

 

[Em Tee]

What I don't like are these services that charge "per lookup". That's far too expensive. We use floodmaps.com because it's a flat monthly fee for as many lookups as we want. Never had a problem with it - love it!!! :lol:

Mary

 

[Paulette in Texas]

Dear Mary: I can't say we have ever tried it. It sounds just fine. We have had absolutely horrible experiences with anything that is not through win2000, so we have just had a policy of: if it is not win2000 approved or related...screw it. Life's too short and I am NOT computer savy.

Our thing is and has always been: they make it so easy. Their fees have always been reasonable and made us look good, so can't say we have every quibbled over $$$'s. If they have good competition and it works for you, then go for it. I just like the 24/7 support and the ease with which it just zaps right into win2000. Call me lazy, call me non-computer smart cause I am always going to take the easy road via win2000.

Some posts earlier were complaining about their fees. I can't say I have ever priced anybody else BECAUSE it wasn't win2000 related or supported. We bought the 750 flat fee for a year stuff. God willing we will also need the additional 250-750 before the year is up. At those prices...I think it amounts to .26 per map. That certainly sounds cheap to me. Of course, it is late and maybe I am not doing it right. But I think I am and goodness, they look sooooooo much better than what we had been reducing and scanning into our reports the last 7 years.

I understand those that are lucky to be able to work in only a small area with one set of FEMA maps, this is probably no big deal. But to those of us in Huge Metro Areas like the Greater Houston area which covers FIVE counties, it is a god send. It is very expensive, time consuming and of course POTLUCK getting correct info from the FEMA people to make sure you are current with all counties. GEEEEEEZZZZZ, that's our tax dollars for you.

So why fight it. We can't possibly know the several hundred panels that cover our work area. It is wonderful to click, click and have them do it for us. We can then go to the file cabinets and verify if we think there is a question. But so far they have done 40+- in the last 7-9 days and all were right on. So, thanks to the right on, professional looking and definitely time saving Interflood thingie. And all for pennies. If y'all have something that works as well as theirs, do it to it. Works for me. I wonder what they will think of next. I just appreciate the yahoooooo out of them making things go faster. At this rate, we might really get to have a life. NO, that's not what appraisers do. Paulette in Texas
go w...
Rotts rule and shih tzus hold their own.

 

[Blue1]

Check those flood zones carefully! If you can't tell (due to vague flood map) disclaim it on the report. i.e. "The subject (appears to be OR does not appear to be) in a flood zone due to lack of detail on map, a flood professional should be consulted." This little comment has pulled my **** out of the fire on occasion! I just received all new flood maps.....I'll still check out interflood though.....

P.S. Watch out for those LOMR letters!

 

[Pamela Crowley (Florida)]

I've been reading all this with interest and decided to go ahead and put in my $.02. I always double check the flood zones and never rely just on what Alamode has as I have found an error - just a couple of times. All my reports get CYA language.

If the site appears to be 100% outside of a flood zone, check 'No'. Put
in: "Subject appears to be in Flood Zone X; subject to current survey &
Flood Certification.

If the site appears to be 100% in a flood zone, check 'Yes'. Put in:
"Subject appears to be in Flood Zone AE; subject to current survey & Flood
Certification."

If the site appears to be partially in both, check BOTH 'Yes' and 'No'.
Put in: "Rear of subject site appears to be in Flood Zone AE and front of
site appears to be in Flood Zone X; subject to current survey & Flood
Certification.", or whatever applies for the situation.

I've never been questioned when I use #3. All are pretty good at CYA. If
anyone wants more, I simply tell them that I'm not a surveyor and that a new survey with elevations would be necessary to make any further
determinations. Simple and it's the truth. Don't make this harder than it is but DO check the flood zones and CYA.

 

[Rick Neighbors]

Went to the Alamode training this weekend in Dallas and was favorably impressed! The flood data worked fine at my computer. The "hands on" method of learning software is vastly superior to taking notes and then trying to remember why you wrote what you did later. Learned a lot.

 

[Anonymous]

lenders flood cert co. - lenders I work with order their own flood certs.

Amen.

What scares me is it appears a lot of folk above are taking a risk certifying flood zones. No thanky u. If it is even a close call, I defer to a surveyor and/or expert. I am not going to certify anything!

In 1974, I stood on a bank and watched water cross near my home 3' above the bannisters of the bridge on Hwy. 12. That bridge was designed to be ABOVE the 100 yr. flood zone. That rain was 14 in. in 8 hr. One bank had 8' of water in its vault. Do you think a homeowner without flood insurance would hesitate a minute to sue you or me had we certified that the property was NOT in a flood map? And my flood maps clearly show a whole lot of turf I KNOW was under water in 1974. Further, I did flood routing for dam construction when I worked for a development. Flood water gets deeper as more of the watershed is covered in roofs, golf courses, roads, etc. It is called reducing the "Time of Concentration" As these outdated maps (ours is 1991) march on, the floods will get further out to left field.
As for the "100 year flood" above, There were three such floods between 1891 and 1974 in my community. Getting the appraiser to certify flood zones is reducing lending costs at the risk of the appraiser.

 

[Ross (CO)]

So....Terr, it must be nice to have clients who will always get their own flood certs, and thus free you up from having to make such a declaration. What do you do on your 1004, about half-way down on the right side of page 1 ?.....are you able to leave those few fields open, or blank, with no in-put, or are you able to put in "See Addendum" and then state that "Client prefers to fulfill their own certification of floodzone" ? It is so dramatically different for us here in CO, compared to so many, many others (appraisers) who live in parts of the country where flood potential is there with ANY major storm coming through the area. We just had an article in our Sunday paper about how some folks had allegedly violated floodplain regs by "doing their own thing" along streamcourses with erosion control stuff and channel re-directing, etc. Clearly, the more land man re-contours, paves with concrete and asphalt, and improves with new rooftops and margin culverts, the more the need to re-map floodplain contours to the inch ! It is still nature which can change the best laid "plans" of man to show just where, and how, and to what extent the water is going to flow when the right storm hits. It's only when a local area experiences the next "big one" that man gets to observe just how well he drew those contours. There are really many other sources to which a buyer / borrower can turn for prudent and logical data about flood potential at the house they are about to buy or about to re-fi.....sad to think that THEIR common sense is not sufficient and that later they need the help of a crafty lawyer to chase down some appraiser for making the "wrong" designation about a flood zone designation ! Hopefully every one of us will forever avoid the threat, or worry, about making the wrong call about a floodzone. What will appraisers do when global warming melts all the polar ice caps ?

 

[rtubbs]

Ross, I believe if you check into it, ALL lenders, 50 states, are required by law (federal law), and have been for several years, to obtain flood certifications and those certifications are not from appraisers. I can almost assure you that even in CO lenders are obtaining flood certs from other sources.

Ron in Alabama

 

[Ross (CO)]

Ron, and Larry too.....o.k., that is good to know that leners in all states very likely do acquire their own flood certs, independant of the appraiser. That is part of the "common sense" to which I was referring, such that considerations of flood "potential" also would carry over to the home buyer / borrower. Without getting too far into the issue of water movement, acts of God (insurance jargon) and man's influence upon how he causes much of his own woes......my question to you both is, what do you do in those few fields of your 1004, page 1 ? Do you still make your call on which flood panel the subject is in ? Is your best determination always going to be over-ridden by the certification secured by the lender/client, kept and recorded (somewhere) in the lenders papers ? Will their designation always clear you of any liability over flood zone issues for that property in the life of the loan ? Do you leave those form fields open, or put * marks in there ? Perhaps the 2-line "Comments" field immediately below the flood zone data is where one can say something about the lender securing the certification. Can one establish an encompassing "condition" to the your completed report that the "lender/ client shall obtain the flood certification" and as such toss the ball into their court and expect no rebuttal. To date, I always have put the data in the fields, and have never even asked a client about whether they do that on their own anyway, and it has never been a post-report issue for me, knock on wood. You and Larry have stirred an overall liability issue in your comments and I merely want to see how that shakes out in the big-happy-family arena in which we all participate.