Virgina REAB and Portal Petition

[Carnivore]

Are you saying that appraisers can't develop a report that fits FNCs templates?

Only by coincidence.


Potato Head,

When I print a hard copy report from my wintotal and print a hard copy report from my converted PDF the two laying side by side on the kitchen table look exactly the same and are in exactly the same sequence.

When I do this with the FNC conversion viewer and Wintotal the two DONOT LOOK THE SAME.

Pages are in a different order, addendums appear with text from one page that the text has been removed. THEY DO NOT LOOK THE SAME.

How much simpler can I get then that. If you dont understand it is because you dont want to understand.

 

[woodyva]

"Appraisal reports are all about accurately communicating the appraiser's analyses, opinions and conclusions. If those are getting changed or deleted then there's going to be a problem. "

That is the issue George, these formats are not as accurate as a PDF. If there is an issue with the PDF conversion teh appraiser can speak with tech support and tweak small variances, with lighthouse and FNC that is not an option. You either do it 100% the way they desire it or you are out of luck. Their formats are old technologies that severly cripple an appraisers ability to communicate effectively.

 

[George Hatch]

I understand what you're saying. You're saying that the way you build appraisal reports and the content you put into them won't fit into FNCs templates without rearrangement and in some areas, deletion. However, that's not the same thing as saying that FNCs templates are so limited that you can't provide a meaningful workproduct to your intended users for those assignments.

So lets look at other forms of reporting.

When I'm providing an oral report, that mode of reporting "interferes" with my ability to use the aerial photos and graphs and written explanations and extensive assumptions and limiting conditions that I normally use in other assignments.

Let's say I'm a verbal guy and presenting oral reports is my preferred mode of communication. The limitations of the pre-printed forms infringe on my right of free expression and interfere with my ability to use my verbal skills in communicating my appraisals.

We could even use the restrictive "form" formats as an example of limitations that interfere with a "narrative-centric" appraiser's ability to communicate their appraisals.

The big question here isn't whether one form or file format has limitations - they all do. Rather, the question is whether those limitations prevent me from rendering a meaningful workproduct to my intended users given their needs? You have to be a little careful here, because my needs as an appraiser are not the only consideration. Note that the SOWR tests acceptability for development using the two tests; it's hard to imagine one of those tests being omitted for decisions about reports.

The form, format and style of a report are functions of the needs of the intended users as well as the appraisers. The substantiative content determines its compliance.

I read that bolded clause to mean that if FNCs template doesn't allow me to send an aerial photo but my client still deems that template to be sufficient for their use then perhaps that photo isn't a deal breaker for me.

 

[George Hatch]

Only by coincidence.

LOL.

Proving intent is the most difficult element of defining misconduct. That's why a smart reviewer sticks to looking for outright errors and avoids getting into peeing matches over something they can't "prove".

When I do this with the FNC conversion viewer and Wintotal the two DONOT LOOK THE SAME

Are you saying you can't do a version in Wintotal that looks THE SAME as the FNC version? What, does FNC use a font that Wintotal won't support?

----------------

Woodva

Fannie has backed off of requiring the .env. They did so after this mess started in Virginia. Fannie is a large corporation and policy decisions are made with the intent to make money, and their own guidelines are not something they seem to have kept close to heart with the direction they originally took with appraisal port.

First off, I am well known around these parts for my strident criticisms of Fannie and their forms and their understanding an application of USPAP via their forms. Nevertheless, I have no problems ceding to Fannie that which is rightfully their's, the right to make their own decisions about what - in addition to our minimums - they consider to be meaningful to them.

Please note the distinction between "Fannie has backed off of requiring the .env." vs. saying something like: "Fannie doesn't accept files that have been through that process". Maybe they are unsure at this point and maybe they are waiting to see how the lawsuits and VA board decisions go. However, absent those external factors, Fannie's internal preferences prior to these lawsuits appear to be quite clear.

 

[TJSum]

"Much better version"? You're arguing a matter of degree here. A pdf is better than an env.file. A fax is better than an env.file. A lazer-jet hardcopy is better than a fax. A typewritten hardcopy is better than a laser-jet version. A handwritten copy is better than a typewritten version. An oral version is better than a handwritten version. What comes after that I have no idea, but I'm sure it's equally pointless.

Appraisal reports are all about accurately communicating the appraiser's analyses, opinions and conclusions. If those are getting changed or deleted then there's going to be a problem. Otherwise.....

My red above, that hits the main issue. However, under the current system, who's to know? There is no method built into the system to protect against this. With the current state of technology, we can debate until the cows come home what a true copy is and what it should be. Not to sound like a broken record, but the only way to protect the Public Trust, Lenders and Appraisers is to have a transparent national "vault" with a standard software delivery system. The vault will hold the true copy. It is no different than everyone speaking the same language or using the same currency in order to allow commerce to proceed effectively and efficiently. Technology will not fix this problem, in fact it is making it worse by allowing more opportunities for easier report manipulation. Going back to snail mail will not fix the problem. The only fix is to bring much more transparency to the process.

 

[woodyva]

You are right, but what if showing the aerial picture of the toxic dump next door is possible and you can not show it? I know that you can explain it in a narrative manner, but why step back 15 years when a picture is worth a thousand pages of narrative?

I beleive that it is reasonable for FNC and the others to continue to do business, but they need to allow us to provide them with a report that they convert. The possibility to get the PDF to the client and then have the interim company that is managing QC for them to get a copy of the PDF to convert into whatever they want to convert it to is the best of all worlds. Besides the liability issue of converting they do run into the issue of lining up an appraiser's style to their format, but that is a relatively small issue as they simply want the gridded data for variance of their repsective tolerances. The QC prgrams can only work on the quantitative and not the narrative data.

 

[George Hatch]

BTW, in case I haven't been specific enough I can summarize it like this:

I make a distinction between an appraiser being unable to work within the FNC (or alamode or ACI or Word) templates and being unwilling to do it. If it's the former then it may be FNCs problem, but if it's the latter then it's probably the appraisers' problem.

 

[Workbox]

Maybe it is time to change the forms to where they is no need for these conversions and it is easier for the final user and UW.

 

[George Hatch]

You guys keep referring to going back in time as if that's the only direction there is. What about the compromises you've already made in the past in order to take advantage of advances in productivity and expediency? Does "no compromise" only count when you're trying to use it to slay the datamining dragons from behind?

 

[Couch Potato]

You are right, but what if showing the aerial picture of the toxic dump next door is possible and you can not show it? I know that you can explain it in a narrative manner, but why step back 15 years when a picture is worth a thousand pages of narrative?

How about because it is required to meet the client's requirements which are reasonable, or because the appraiser agreed to use the format and that it was acceptable?

IMHO, the Virginia board is creating a problem where none exists rather than investing their energy and resources on protecting the public from actual poor appraisal practices of their licensees.