UAD Condition Ratings

[Metamorphic]

Just make it C3.5

Truly, a 3.5 is just as okey dokey for the kind of computer analysis the GSE's intend as integers. If there was anybody involved in UAD that had dirt under their fingernails (maybe "dog poop in the tread of their shoes" is a better euphemism for a seasoned appraiser) .5's and maybe even 0.1's would have been available.

How cool would that be if you could use 1/10ths to track small variation in QnC and they apply a small incremental adjustment. Maybe $2,000 per tenth.

 

[jakeboeger]

Maybe this is the GSE's way of forcing the user of the appraisal to actually read the report!

 

[normando]

It takes too much effort for the reader to read all the comments and decipher the abbreviations. You know the form could have been made simpler so the reader would actually read the report.

 

[Smokey Bear]

Just make it C3.5

 

[timd354]

Am I completely wrong, or is possible and acceptable to apply adjustments within the same condition rating? I understand that it's an overall rating, however it simply makes no sense to me that all C3's are going to be the same quality. For instance, if I've got a subject that is well maintained, has all new expensive hardwood flooring and all bathrooms have been upgraded, that (to me) is a C3. If a comp is well maintained, has wood laminate flooring and 1 upgraded bath, that's still a C3 (to me). But it's not as high quality as the subject. Wouldn't it stand to reason that an adjustment would be made? Is there some specific language that explains this to an U/W? I've attempted to do just that, but they don't like my wording (something to the effect of 'condition is same rating, however improvements are superior/inferior to subject'....

????

See UAD FAQ Q26 Posted on Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's web sites):

Q26. If the subject property and a comparable property have features represented on the sales comparison approach grid identically, but which merit an adjustment, is an adjustment permitted? For example, both the subject property and a comparable property feature a view that is rated as Beneficial; Water View (B;Wtr), yet the water view from the subject property is recognized in the market as being superior (or inferior) to the water view from the comparable property.

Both properties can be rated as having beneficial water views, but the market can recognize a difference in the quality of the views. These differences must be adjusted for in the sales comparison approach grid and an explanation must be provided in the sales comparison approach comment field or in an addendum.

 

[Keyser Soze]

Note: UAD required quality ratings include a range. (see glossary at end of comments section for UAD definition of quality ratings) A comp may be within the same quality rated range, yet variances of quality within that rating require adjustment. "

For QUALITY:

Note: UAD required condition ratings include a range. (see glossary at end of comments section for UAD definition of condition ratings) A comp may be within the same condition rated range, yet variances of quality within that rating require adjustment.

Nice veribage annoyingguy. I tweaked it just a bit;

Note: The stupid UAD required quality ratings include a range which is stupid. (see stupid glossary at end of comments section for stupid UAD definition of stupid quality ratings) A comp may be within the same quality rated range, yet variances of quality within that rating require adjustment. "

Note: The stupid UAD required condition ratings include a range which is stupid. (see stupid glossary at end of comments section for stupid UAD definition of stupid condition ratings) A comp may be within the same condition rated range, yet variances of quality within that rating require adjustment.

JK. I just interchanged words like parameters and limits and stupid.

 

[residentialguy]

Hey, I'm not annoying...that just you conscious telling you to listen and learn :new_cussing:

 

[John Lizotte]

I don't think they read the comments.

I know they dont sometimes, I cant tell you how many times they've asked me to explain something that was already explained, I just copy and paste what I already wrote and paste it into the end of the addendum where I put everything they're asking for and its ok, damn AMC's