Is there a requirement for this?

[Mike Boyd]

Bracketing is a means of demonstrating there is a market for your final analysis of value. If you have one or more lower values and one or more higher values, (bracketed) and you make adjustments for differences in characteristics, then the indicated values of the comps should support your final value and demonstrate that there is a market. Without that demonstration, the underwriter will likely ask you for additional comps, or, cut your value.

 

[Mike Phillips]

Tell the underwriter the exact same thing your saying here and they should understand and respect your decision. Somtimes it just has to be spelt out.

Hey Greg -

You the same dude who authored "Landsafe/Countrywide Sucks!" over there in GB&U?

Some dude with the same name as your's said "The lesson learned here is no matter what the lender asks for you better just do it, and don't do what I did and try to prove a point resulting in a yelling contest.."

Didn't you try to prove a point - a fairly meaningless point, and end up getting pizzed, and lose a client you had worked for for 6 years?

Hate to bust balls my friend (sincerely). But I believe at least several of us are trying to encourage the OP to calm down, listen to reason and keep a client.

Seems to me your experience with Landsafe is relevant here.

 

[Anthem]

Bracketing the sales price of the comps to your estimated value/sales price could force an appraiser to:
A-Use non comparable sales
B-Inflate the value

Case in point I recently had a semi complex report, chose the best comps based everything but sales price. My adjusted value was lower than all of the sales prices, there were no comps that I could have used that had a lower sales price to bracket the value. Yes the adjusted values bracketed the value.

UW asks for a lower priced home to bracket the sales price???

Skippy says it is easier to have not made the market warranted adjustments and then stay within the bracketed sales price's.

At the end of the day we need to choose the comps that best represent the value of the subject and sometimes it ain't pretty.

 

[Tom Eichholz]

Based on various inane requests through the years, I have always felt that most mortgage UW's use a standard template, like for the little circles you color in on your answer sheet on a standardized exam.

UW Review Scenario: UW places template grading sheet over your appraisal; No filled in color in the circle where their manual says it should be-It's Wrong, Period! Need More & Better Comps! (Those superior Holdbacks you chose not to use).

Other appraiser's will argue, well then, you should: Explain! Explain! Explain!

Why bother? Report NOT Read! Report NOT Read! Report NOT Read! When obviously USPAP Guidelines are irrelevant or unknown to them. Which reminds me of the frequently requested addition of certain language or an explanation to a report --- "and Appraiser to provide...and why was that left out?" I then proceed to steer them to the location of those exact words they requested which were contained in the original report. "Oh!"

UW's admittedly can be exasperating, with frequently no logic, no common sense, no reading the report in it's entirety and then analyzing the information provided in its full context. The same goes for bracketing the S.P. It's their rule...if it's not there, it's wrong, period-manual says, "Need More Comps!"

Appraiser Wisdom: The weaker the Borrower, the more they will turn on the Appraiser. (The Lender really doesn't want to make the loan, so who's the easiest to blame? Right! You! The Mean or Bad Appraiser!).

 

[Doug in NC]

So, the question I have is, does an underwriter have the authority to act on intuition alone, or does the underwriter have to follow written rules and guidelines like the rest of us? My experience tells me it is the latter.

I'll be waiting to find out. I hate for a loan to be delayed, but as far as I'm concerned, I didn't create this dilemma. Unless the underwriter can give me a valid written reference to support her wish for new comparables, or explain what is wrong with the sales I did provide, I won't be providing more free comparable sales information. If the lender is willing to pay for extraneous work, I'll give them as many comps as they want - for a fair fee.

 

[Marcia Langley]

So, the question I have is, does an underwriter have the authority to act on intuition alone, or does the underwriter have to follow written rules and guidelines like the rest of us? My experience tells me it is the latter.

Doug,

Evidently this UW feels you have failed to support your opinion of value. I don't know where you personally draw the line between "intuition alone" and "written rules" but IMO this situation is not that cut and dried.

The word "credible" is part of our written rules but there is not a written list of specific actions that make a conclusion more or less credible. USPAP says your analyses must be credible. If your client thinks it is not (rightly or wrongly) then IMO it behooves you to address the issue.

Many of your peers believe the sales comparison analysis should include a range of properties that sold above and below the opined value. We believe an analysis that does so tends toward more credibility and one that does not tends toward less credibility.

USPAP does not include the details of methodology of the sort that is found in textbooks. But credibility absolutely depends on use of those methodologies.

Only you (not us because we have not reviewed it) can opine whether your report was credible. Frankly, given only the sketchy info posted here, my first impression is that it sounds like you over valued. If I read the report, I would likely feel otherwise.

If you want to dig your heels in in defense of your report and are willing to let it continue to be considered "unsupported" by your client then that is your business decision.

This is not quite the same thing as an UW asking for additional comps without citing a reason. The UW has cited a reason that seems appropriate to a good percentage of your peers.

It's really not a question of what the UW is "allowed" to do as long as they are not asking for something unethical or illegal.

 

[Doug in NC]

Frankly, given only the sketchy info posted here, my first impression is that it sounds like you over valued.

First impressions can often be deceiving.

 

[Marcia Langley]

First impressions can often be deceiving.

Very true.

That's why I also said:

If I read the report, I would likely feel otherwise.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

:icon_idea:All 3 sales adjusted higher than sale price.:new_smile-l:






Did the report explain the apparent below market variance? (if such really was the case)



p.s. my tag line is also appropriate for UW.