Quality UAD

[J Grant]

I've done it a couple of times -we are human.

Do not make a big deal about it ! Keep your explanation brief and simple., such as the below:

"On a prior 8 month old appraisal appraiser rated comp X as a C 3. The condition though rated C 3, had some older components that were close to a rating of C 4. On present appraisal, after re considering the age and overall condition, the appraiser has rated comp as a C 4. "

THE END. The client also just wants to get rid of this and be provided with an explanation that makes sense.

 

[Mejappz]

Collateral Underwriter is celebrating six years of intellectual appraiser data theft. Happy Birthday!

 

[Albert2]

Got it. What were the subject Q ratings on the 2 appraisals. Just fishing for a way to help with explanation.

Got it. What were the subject Q ratings on the 2 appraisals. Just fishing for a way to help with explanation.

Consistently put Q4 on old appraisal, consistently put Q3 on new appraisal.

 

[Alsie35]

No, it was entirely my fault. I switch between Q3 and Q4 too much and need to stick with one or the other.

You should decide in your mind which of your market area developments are Q3 and which are Q4 quality, then NEVER deviate again in what quality you call the homes in each respective area.

If you've done this (changing ratings) a lot, FANNIE MAE will send you a letter telling you that its a "no-no" unless:

1. You have personally inspected the property SINCE the last time you used the other rating, or

2. The property has sold SINCE the last time you used the previous rating for it.

The same exact thing applies to changing "C" condition ratings.

They track this stuff.

Now if you have to use a comp that you rated a "Q3" in a prior report in a new report where you are using "Q4" as a rating for subject, I recommend that you put a "0" on the grid and a comment in the addendum that the difference in quality is minimal instead of changing the rating you used before.

A lot of appraisers who've been doing this for decades were incorrectly taught long, long ago that this stuff is relative, and that so long you are consistent for the purposes of the report at hand, its OK to switch a Q rating or a C rating for a comp. But that is NOT what USPAP and FANNIE say.

And since about 2014 they are tracking this stuff and enforcing conformity and uniformity.

 

[Albert2]

I've done it a couple of times -we are human.

Do not make a big deal about it ! Keep your explanation brief and simple., such as the below:

"On a prior 8 month old appraisal appraiser rated comp X as a C 3. The condition though rated C 3, had some older components that were close to a rating of C 4. On present appraisal, after re considering the age and overall condition, the appraiser has rated comp as a C 4. "

THE END. The client also just wants to get rid of this and be provided with an explanation that makes sense.

Great answer, thank you very much, and thank all of you!

 

[RCA]

UAD is an attempt to get quality/condition ratings for a number of purposes, some of which I am sure are undisclosed. I suppose that the ratings would help the GSEs with their own regressions on neighborhoods.

But, for example, C4 talks about "minor deferred maintenance" and C5 about "obvious deferred maintenance and in need of significant repairs". "Minor deferred maintenance" should be "obvious". Why would you say a property has minor deferred maintenance if indeed it is not "obvious". What is the threshold for "significant repairs". If you have borderline conditions, this is BS. You could judge a property C4 or C5 depending on your mood, or you flip a coin. UAD are called "absolute" standards, and perhaps in a sense they are. Yet, they are certainly vague.

So, you say somewhere, preferably upfront, that "This property is borderline C3/C4 and I have arbitrarily given it a C4 for now or vice versa, 3 months from now I may change my mind."

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

I am curious that if you build your data base (which I always did) when I pull in the comp from a list, it should still have the same data I used before (Q rating). Are you not using your database to save comps for reuse?

 

[RCA]

I am curious that if you build your data base (which I always did) when I pull in the comp from a list, it should still have the same data I used before (Q rating). Are you not using your database to save comps for reuse?

Do you use Alamode? Now I have been using it since about 2 weeks. It has a tool for pulling in comps from some peer shared database. So, there is a "Show" button for each comparable that when clicked on will come up with values from "peers". You may seen 10+ "peer" ratings for C, Q, GLA and other features. -- I haven't really used Alamode or any other software since 2008, so this is new. Of course if you use this feature, then you have to share your information as well. I am not sure I will continue with this. But I need to get back into the swing of things here and find out what other appraisers are doing.

I am a little concerned about getting my Chief Architect floor plans in to the report. It used to be easy, when Aurora would allow .emf files to be imported. Total doesn't allow that, so I have to export to an EMF file from Chief Architect, open the EMF with IrfanView and then export from IrfanView to a .jpg, bring that up and then use the Snipping Tool to embed in the addenda. That seems to work just barely. Maybe Alamode will put that feature for embedding EMF files in to Total. That would be great.

I was worried about getting my QGIS maps in, but they seem to import OK, if I use the windows Snipping Tool. Quality is good - much better than for the floorplans.

BTW, while I have databases, I have never had much use for a database for old comps. I almost always do things from scratch.

 

[Dublin ohio]

Clickforms has a consistency checker that compares comps in report with those in your database. No sharing involved

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Do you use Alamode?

Nope. I don't use software, all narrative. But when I did (about 5 years ago) I was using Clickforms and it allowed you to save your comps. Since I worked rural areas we (my residential cohort and I) kept about all the sales in our area in the database and had frequent opportunity to use them several times.