Quality UAD

[Joe Flacco]

It was an example. Get a grip. As far as who uses something other than granite or solid surface. I suppose in your high priced market. Probably nobody. But around here. You still see a lot of laminate counters in new construction and remodeling. Some are so well designed. That unless you actually examine them up close. They look just like granite or quartz. It depends on the price point of the neighborhood.

What you mean get a grip. So you make a separate adjustment for granite countertops in quality and then make a separate adjustment for condition? Do you change the quality rating cus you got some granite countertops? I'm just saying things are not clear cut. I am not saying you suck or something. You get a grip.

 

[Joe Flacco]

What also gets lumped into condition adjustment is functional obsolescence. When you remodel a old home and cure functional obsolescence, that gets lumped into condition. With the adjustment reflecting the scope of the renovation. If not, then there should be a lot of appraisal reports with functional utility adjustments.

 

[Carnivore]

I am aware of no such effort.

What! I am sure we all had a discussion on here about the C & Q ratings.

Maybe I was dreaming...


Wait, I found what you said Post #19 https://appraisersforum.com/forums/threads/give-me-a-break.228363/page-2#post-3031601

"Those Definitions will be revised"

 

[Dublin ohio]

What you mean get a grip. So you make a separate adjustment for granite countertops in quality and then make a separate adjustment for condition? Do you change the quality rating cus you got some granite countertops? I'm just saying things are not clear cut. I am not saying you suck or something. You get a grip.

You obviously have a comprehension problem. Read my post. It was an example. It had nothing to do with what I do. It had to do with what was being done by some appraiser's before the Q ratings.

 

[Joe Flacco]

You obviously have a comprehension problem. Read my post. It was an example. It had nothing to do with what I do. It had to do with what was being done by some appraiser's before the Q ratings.

I don't know what you getting all angry for. I'm just pointing out some issues with the ratings.

 

[Dublin ohio]

I don't know what you getting all angry for. I'm just pointing out some issues with the ratings.

Not angry at all. Just do not understand why you would take a simple example and turn it into a convoluted mess

 

[Joe Flacco]

Not angry at all. Just do not understand why you would take a simple example and turn it into a convoluted mess

It is not simple. It is a convoluted mess. UAD that is. It is still better than no ratings though.

 

[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.

Are you saying that the fact that I am not in the field now has somehow erased the memory/knowledge/experience from having been in the field for 29 years? If not, then I don’t understand the point of the opening sentence

i was databasing my comps and trying to report things consistently BEFORE UAD was even a thing.

I honestly do not understand the challenge, other than the natural tendency to keep doing things the way one has always done it rather than adapting to change. The definitions are far from perfect, but they are also no so unclear that a seasoned appraiser should have any trouble in looking at a property holistically and rendering an appropriate rating. When they first came out I developed my own spreadsheet to rate a property, especially an older property with components that would fall into different categories. It wasn’t that tough. But, I think many never approached it with that kind of rigor. For me, it was important because we had a firm, and we wanted consistency not just from report to report, but from appraiser to appraiser.

 

[Joe Flacco]

Are you saying that the fact that I am not in the field now has somehow erased the memory/knowledge/experience from having been in the field for 29 years? If not, then I don’t understand the point of the opening sentence

i was databasing my comps and trying to report things consistently BEFORE UAD was even a thing.

I honestly do not understand the challenge, other than the natural tendency to keep doing things the way one has always done it rather than adapting to change. The definitions are far from perfect, but they are also no so unclear that a seasoned appraiser should have any trouble in looking at a property holistically and rendering an appropriate rating. When they first came out I developed my own spreadsheet to rate a property, especially an older property with components that would fall into different categories. It wasn’t that tough. But, I think many never approached it with that kind of rigor. For me, it was important because we had a firm, and we wanted consistency not just from report to report, but from appraiser to appraiser.

Maybe it is easier with the properties in Tennessee.

No they are not perfect. So Fannie, Freddie and their representatives should cut it out with the "why can't these appraisers get it right" stuff. They get what they get and should deal with it.

 

[Terrel L. Shields]

Quality - materials and/or workmanship
Condition - physical state

I used to take a house to the board of equalization every three years. They would change the rating to a D2-10 (roughly a Q2 less 10% for having only AC downstairs) from a D-3 minus 10 (~Q3 less 10). The argument was - nice view over a creek from a bluff, nice houses across the road, and it had a stately appearance and 3 fireplaces plus a slate roof.

Those slates are a nightmare to maintain. And they finally tore them off and replaced them. And the slates were original from the late 1890s or first decade of the 20th Century...yes there was some great crown molding - walnut staircase, pocket doors to close off the dining room. But it was built 100 years ago. The 3 fireplaces were draft chimneys and the house was cold in winter and hot in summer. High utility bills. It had no insulation, electric wires were on porcelain insulators in pairs, single pane large wood windows, and no a/c upstairs and the owners had only a simple small kitchen with ordinary appliances. Utilities bills were horrible

100 years ago, this house was top of the line. Few homes in that town were better. So I would argue that Q ratings can change over long periods of time. Changes in technology etc. certainly impacts the quality. Some might argue those old houses were "better". But I have seem them torn down. No fire breaks between 24" spaced wall studs? "Insulation" consists of newspaper. Yes, the walls studs were full 2" x 4". Yes, they used yellow pine. But often hand mixed concrete foundations came apart, or foundations were built on hand picked limestone rocks from the creek.

In 2016, when the house sold for $127,000 it was valued at $174,000 by the assessor and still is. I had challenged the valuations which were all over $200,000 from 1998 to 2009. That one factor was key. I had the copy of the field card and each time I found they had changed the quality rating to a higher rating. And every time I got the valuation knocked back by about 30-40%. [each rating was about 15%-20% and some overlapped with the ± 10%-20% steps] but the assessor also rated the "neighborhood factor" based upon the Q of the house, so if you rolled back the quality, the "Neighborhood factor" went down too. Go figure. I never did clearly understand that neighborhood factor except it was something to do with the fact their cost book was about 10 years out of date.