Quality UAD

[Alsie35]

Chalk up another positive factor for the appraisal industry. Pay a few bucks for a new state license, or possibly reciprocal access, and presto one has successfully relocated professionally. (I also would extend an industry kudo to any nationwide AMC that would begin to allocate assignments in a new market, although the AF dislikes AMC's for every possible reason. . .)

As someone once said: "You ain't kidding."

Having worked as a lawyer in a past life, I found the provincialism of the state Bar Associations (each state makes you take its own Bar Exam to be able to work there) is a dumb restrictive factor (except as a way of reducing competition).

Of course, the legal industry is MASSIVELY over-populated, and a terrible drag on the economy and on society as a result (a discussion for another Board), whereas we have the opposite problem at the moment in appraisal practice in terms of numbers.

 

[TMG]

IMO - The quality of a comp can change depending on what you compare it to. It may be Q3 compared to a Q4, or maybe a Q4 when compared to a Q2. Who says it has to be the same every time? Also, maybe it was Q3 12 mos ago, but now it appears Q4.

If it does not affect the appraised value, then I think the nitpicking over prior classifications is lame.

 

[Alsie35]

IMO - The quality of a comp can change depending on what you compare it to. It may be Q3 compared to a Q4, or maybe a Q4 when compared to a Q2. Who says it has to be the same every time? Also, maybe it was Q3 12 mos ago, but now it appears Q4.

If it does not affect the appraised value, then I think the nitpicking over prior classifications is lame.

I'm not going to argue your reasoning. It seemed logical to me too and that is the way I always used to do it. In law enforcement they used to call that "discretion". And just like in law enforcement, it has been largely taken away.

Because FANNIE doesn't see it that way. Once you called it a Q4 and/or a C4 and used it as a comp IN THIS SALES CYCLE they want you to keep it consistent in all future reports until it either a. sells again or b. you inspect it personally. And they won't be shy in telling you that if you change those ratings on the same comp too many times in your reports .... to borrow a metaphor ... I don't make the rules ... I just report them ...

 

[DWiley]

IMO - The quality of a comp can change depending on what you compare it to. It may be Q3 compared to a Q4, or maybe a Q4 when compared to a Q2. Who says it has to be the same every time? Also, maybe it was Q3 12 mos ago, but now it appears Q4.

If it does not affect the appraised value, then I think the nitpicking over prior classifications is lame.

I am struggling to understand this post. The quality rating is supposed to be based on the definitions provided in the UAD, and those definitions remain the same as the subject property changes. So, how does the subject property change the rating of a comp? The answer is, of course, that it doesn’t. Rating based on comparison to the subject is the exact opposite of the UAD instructions.

 

[Joe Flacco]

Anybody that is actively doing appraisals knows what TMG is saying. I know it sounds simple like the rating is the rating and it doesn't change. And it shouldn't in theory. It is difficult to explain how the UAD ratings actually work and fit in the real world as a practicing appraiser. It just comes down to a lot of properties not fitting neatly into the definitions.

 

[Joe Flacco]

Q ratings are easier with new construction but with older homes it's not very straight forward.

 

[J Grant]

IMO - The quality of a comp can change depending on what you compare it to. It may be Q3 compared to a Q4, or maybe a Q4 when compared to a Q2. Who says it has to be the same every time? Also, maybe it was Q3 12 mos ago, but now it appears Q4.

If it does not affect the appraised value, then I think the nitpicking over prior classifications is lame.

the relationships between comps ( or between a comp and the subject ) can change , seen in adjustments or narrative commentary. However, that does not change the rating of the house itself, because the rating is what the house consists of, as a stand alone.

A Q 3 house does not change itself, just because it is compared to Q2 or Q 4 houses. The market's perspective of comparing them, and thus the adjustments made is what changes..

A six foot tall person does not change height because they are standing next to a five foot tall person or a seven foot tall person, They remain six feet tall .(their rating for being six feet in height )

The six foot person looks taller when standing next to the five foot person, but can look shorter standing next to the seven foot person. That would be explained in narrative ( and if one were adjusting for a $ worth of height ). If one was appraising a potential for sports, for a basketball league, the height of tall is desired, for a gymnastics team, the short is desired.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Rating based on comparison to the subject is the exact opposite of the UAD instructions.

If it were, we'd go back to the way FHA used to instruct us to fill out the grid - Superior, Equal, Inferior... that system doesn't work either. How superior, how inferior.

When I was doing residential, we tried to find the best comps possible and I long ago found out it is easier to adjust for SF than to adjust for quality. Therefore, every effort was made to find comps of similar construction, then similar age before we considered anything else. Then you have no quality issue - because even if wrongly classified, there is no adjustment to justify. The problem with adjusting for quality is a judgment call at best but almost always entailed making additional adjustments such as lot size, GLA, room count, age, and features/amenities.

 

[Carnivore]

IMO - The quality of a comp can change depending on what you compare it to. It may be Q3 compared to a Q4, or maybe a Q4 when compared to a Q2. Who says it has to be the same every time?

WRONG. Not just wrong but dead wrong. The Q or C Ratings only apply to your Subject. They are NOT relative to each Comparable. They may be the same but, they may be different. If they are different then it may often require an adjustment.

Also, maybe it was Q3 12 mos ago, but now it appears Q4.

Very Possible.. It depends on your Source Date at the bottom of your Grid. The possibility exist especially with New Construction a Change may have been made upping the Quality of Kitchen/Bathrooms OR for example the Listing Agent may have changed the Interior Photos at a date after the original source date you looked at that listing. In MLS ALL Changes made by the Listing Agent are recorded with Date and Time.

If it does not affect the appraised value, then I think the nitpicking over prior classifications is lame.

Lame or not it is not nit-picking. This goes to consistency. Now if you made a mistake...No Biggee we all do at times. Make a small comment.

FTR FNMA and Freddie are working on incorporating 1/2 steps between C1-C6 So we ill see it fairly soon. I also seem to recall DW said there may even be 1/2 steps on the Q Ratings. Probably this will all be changed when they change the FNMA Series Report Formatting.

 

[DWiley]

Anybody that is actively doing appraisals knows what TMG is saying. I know it sounds simple like the rating is the rating and it doesn't change. And it shouldn't in theory. It is difficult to explain how the UAD ratings actually work and fit in the real world as a practicing appraiser. It just comes down to a lot of properties not fitting neatly into the definitions.

I think the problem is that some still think the ratings must be different in order to have an adjustment, or that a difference means there must be an adjustment. Neither of those is true. We set up a comp database to make sure ratings were consistent and only changed them if we got new information. Not that hard to do, especially if your formsware has a database feature.