The Brilliance of CU

[Elliott]

I complete a report for your average AMC. Two weeks later I get a request from the AMC to consider three sales that CU has determined would be better. Oh, and CU says my report has a score of 2.5 (whatever that means). So I run two of the CU's as comparables (they are year old sales, whereas my sales were less than 3-months).

AMC gives me a big thank you.....raised the CU score to 4. I recently had a conversation with a 'review' type who said that CU knows everything, that Fannie knows about every sale. I had to disagree, since my experience is that CU relies on old sales. Reviewer-type says, 'they know about every sale.' My response was, so how do they know about the sales where they don't require appraisals, since that is common in the current market according to Realtors, or they aren't financed with Fannie?

I have wondered since we're entering into the New, Better, Private Fannie, capitalized as an IPO, using real money and real risk, if they aren't in "operation clean up balance sheet" so they can get that big opening day bounce on Wall Street when they ring the bell. Just a thought.

 

[J Grant]

Consider this same almighty big data that comes up with CU blind as a bat "comps"and inane feedback will be used by fannie to value appraisal waiver properties ! And to determine what level of appraisals all the the other properties get.
What could possibly go wrong...

 

[Renee Healion]

When I have seen odd ratings, the subjects stood out as odd ones. One had had a thorough renovation and expansion since the last mortgage, not sale. (Actually two of those.) One where were the land well exceeded the percentage that triggers their fear they may be financing a farm or something with another use than res, but no, it was just an exceptional piece. I had explained all this thoroughly but in words because I am a human. Then a flag is sent to a bank human to go ask me about what I already said. Then a loan is made.

It seemed to me they were relying on old data in the case of contributory value changes since last mortgage record, or something that sets off their ordinary alarm bell, as in their land question.

 

[Flakey]

GIGO

 

[Tim The Enchanter]

CU fails to dazzle me with brilliance.
It succeeds in baffling me with BS.
What a crock.

 

[RCA]

Just because sales comps are more recent doesn't mean they are better. You can likely do very good adjustments based on TIME ... assuming that other market conditions have not changed. In one year, that is probably not likely and any changes you do see in that period are likely superficial. I would rate similarity of GLA, Lot Size, Quality, Condition, View as more important than Date of Sale. But then again, that is assuming you have good regression tools. If all you have is simple linear regression, then you are right.

 

[glenn walker]

I complete a report for your average AMC. Two weeks later I get a request from the AMC to consider three sales that CU has determined would be better. Oh, and CU says my report has a score of 2.5 (whatever that means). So I run two of the CU's as comparables (they are year old sales, whereas my sales were less than 3-months).

AMC gives me a big thank you.....raised the CU score to 4. I recently had a conversation with a 'review' type who said that CU knows everything, that Fannie knows about every sale. I had to disagree, since my experience is that CU relies on old sales. Reviewer-type says, 'they know about every sale.' My response was, so how do they know about the sales where they don't require appraisals, since that is common in the current market according to Realtors, or they aren't financed with Fannie?

I have wondered since we're entering into the New, Better, Private Fannie, capitalized as an IPO, using real money and real risk, if they aren't in "operation clean up balance sheet" so they can get that big opening day bounce on Wall Street when they ring the bell. Just a thought.

We are trained to use the best and most recent sales' available BUT Fannies CU does' not consider 12 month old comparables to be an-issue, where this often comes up is if there is a similar comparable say on the same street as the subject, Example if the Subject was located at 990 Locust Ave and there was a sale 12 months ago at 965 Locust Ave it would choose that sale over on that closed 60 days ago two streets over, Of course this is not alwasy the case but my experience is CU has no issues with sales that are 12 months old. Add one or two of theirs as additional comps and bingo score gets better and everyone is happy. On RURAL or complex it's rare to ever get a good score.

 

[Flakey]

CU is also not required to bracket everything under the damn sun.

 

[Tim The Enchanter]

Example if the Subject was located at 990 Locust Ave and there was a sale 12 months ago at 965 Locust Ave it would choose that sale over on that closed 60 days ago two streets over,

I dunno. Sometimes one side of the street has an up slope in back and the other side has a down slope with butt kicking view. The view is possibly your dominant feature.

 

[Dublin ohio]

On RURAL or complex it's rare to ever get a good score.

Sometimes on rural. No score