Why the New UAD is DOA

[Sadie]

There must be a reason the software companies are having such difficulty - I suspect the functionality of a drop-down format filled out in real time ( which is how cloud-based BPOs are filled out,) transposed to software forms that are stable and stored in the user's computer, might be fundamentally incompatible? - like welding half a boat onto a four-wheel chassis and expecting it to drive like a car -

Its a completely new product for them too. And they have to keep their existing software functional. its too bad the update couldn't have been more like evolution and less like a catastrophic event. There was room for a more gradual approach.

 

[J Grant]

AI Overview


Software companies struggle with UAD 3.6 because
it's a massive, interdependent overhaul requiring deep integration, moving from narrative to structured data, handling new mandatory fields (energy, photos), managing dual reporting during transition, and dealing with high complexity, forcing costly, time-consuming platform redesigns and creating integration headaches, especially with legacy systems and data.
Key Challenges for Software Providers:

1. Fundamental Shift in Logic: UAD 3.6 isn't just a new form; it's a new "language" with structured, "if/then" data points, less free-form narrative, and mandatory elements like energy efficiency ratings and specific photos, requiring entirely new programming.
2. Deep System Integration: The new format impacts every step from order to submission, meaning software must seamlessly connect with lenders' Loan Origination Systems (LOS), Appraisal Management Company (AMC) platforms, and GSE portals.
3. Data Migration & Compatibility: Converting years of comp data and ensuring compatibility with new, complex data fields (e.g., splitting unit vs. project condition) is a major hurdle.
4. Dual Reporting Complexity: During the transition (until November 2026), software must support both the old UAD 2.6 and the new 3.6, complicating workflows and increasing potential for errors.
5. Increased Data Collection: Appraisers need to gather more granular data (photos, energy scores) on-site, demanding robust mobile solutions that many vendors struggle to perfect.
6. High Development Costs: Redesigning platforms, adding new validation logic, and extensive testing requires significant investment, leading to higher prices or per-report models for appraisers.
7. Operational Disruption: Vendors face the pressure of a hard deadline (Nov 2026) to have platforms ready, creating a race to update while managing a confusing dual-system landscape.

What This Means for Users (Appraisers/Lenders):

• Glitches & Clunky Interfaces: Early versions of updated software often have bugs, poor user flow, and usability issues.
• Uncertainty & Choice: Appraisers must choose between vendors, some offering clearer demos (like Appraise-It) and others being less transparent.
• Higher Costs: Expect potential price increases or pay-per-report models as companies recoup development costs.
• Training Demands: More complex data fields mean more training for appraisers to avoid rework and delays.

 

[J Grant]

Add two years to the rollout please!

 

[Sadie]

AI Overview


Software companies struggle with UAD 3.6 because
it's a massive, interdependent overhaul requiring deep integration, moving from narrative to structured data, handling new mandatory fields (energy, photos), managing dual reporting during transition, and dealing with high complexity, forcing costly, time-consuming platform redesigns and creating integration headaches, especially with legacy systems and data.
Key Challenges for Software Providers:

1. Fundamental Shift in Logic: UAD 3.6 isn't just a new form; it's a new "language" with structured, "if/then" data points, less free-form narrative, and mandatory elements like energy efficiency ratings and specific photos, requiring entirely new programming.
2. Deep System Integration: The new format impacts every step from order to submission, meaning software must seamlessly connect with lenders' Loan Origination Systems (LOS), Appraisal Management Company (AMC) platforms, and GSE portals.
3. Data Migration & Compatibility: Converting years of comp data and ensuring compatibility with new, complex data fields (e.g., splitting unit vs. project condition) is a major hurdle.
4. Dual Reporting Complexity: During the transition (until November 2026), software must support both the old UAD 2.6 and the new 3.6, complicating workflows and increasing potential for errors.
5. Increased Data Collection: Appraisers need to gather more granular data (photos, energy scores) on-site, demanding robust mobile solutions that many vendors struggle to perfect.
6. High Development Costs: Redesigning platforms, adding new validation logic, and extensive testing requires significant investment, leading to higher prices or per-report models for appraisers.
7. Operational Disruption: Vendors face the pressure of a hard deadline (Nov 2026) to have platforms ready, creating a race to update while managing a confusing dual-system landscape.

What This Means for Users (Appraisers/Lenders):

• Glitches & Clunky Interfaces: Early versions of updated software often have bugs, poor user flow, and usability issues.
• Uncertainty & Choice: Appraisers must choose between vendors, some offering clearer demos (like Appraise-It) and others being less transparent.
• Higher Costs: Expect potential price increases or pay-per-report models as companies recoup development costs.
• Training Demands: More complex data fields mean more training for appraisers to avoid rework and delays.

This could have been done in stages. Maybe a little longer until full implementation, but a smoother roll out. And easier for all involved. The software companies, appraisers, lender/clients, heck probably even the GSEs.

 

[glenn walker]

For younger p

Does anyone here think that a touch screen will make checking the boxes faster than clicking.

yes for younger people who grew up texting most can touch letters and boxes much faster than clicking a mouse. For older folks with less vision and old joints no it's much slower and more mistakes.

 

[Sadie]

I do think you are on to something Sadie - first ones w a viable product will have a leg up. Then it will be obsolete by the end of 2026...

If that holds true, think of all the resources that have gone into this. From the software companies, lenders, us, a lot of time, energy, and in the case of the software companies, lots of money. For nothing I think the basic premise will be the same, but there will be lots of tweaks. IMO, there is no reason not to have a workable product, but the architects of this little enterprise are so caught up in their own narrative that they forget there is a real world out there.

 

[Bobby Bucks]

If you and 35 are referring to DWiley and JAlexander, they don't have any say so anyways. Their job is to execute the will of the FHFA and those that run the GSE's. And if they dug their heels in and said, "No - by god we're not gonna screw the appraisers any more." They would: (a) get little more than a pat on the back from their fellow appraisers (as there's really not much more to be given), and (b) other appraisers - just as qualified as they - would step in in two shakes of a lamb's tail.

That's more of less what I assumed. I've always appreciated DWiley for participating in the forum through the years. He contributes a great deal and his input does help individual appraisers with day to day appraisal questions.

 

[glenn walker]

The major software companies have either been verified or have submitted their products to Fannie for verification. ACI submitted and I believe had a few fixes they needed and I bet Alamode is in a similar spot. What they all need is to shadow actual appraisers from receipt of assignment to completion. What they have now is pretty unworkable. The first company to get it to a point that we can actually complete a USPAP compliant report in a reasonable amount of time will get the lion's share of the appraiser clients. And while I am sure the software companies know this, they are not taking it very seriously.

Your info is bogus and the software providers have been working hand in hand with the GSES for three years.

 

[Non Sequitur]

Back to the software providers. I'm not sure why there are no street ready versions yet. But beyond that what is getting lost in the noise (IMO) is the most important question: Pricing.

From I've read only one software hopeful has publicly released a schedule, but as nice as he is he doesn't even have a 2.6 version on the street never mind 3.6. The legacy providers are slow walking any talk of pricing. The new guy on the block is floating a per use pricing that is higher than what any indie appraiser will be able to afford. And before anyone believes pricing will not shoot through the roof, try to reconcile any of them absorbing the costs of a multi-year project.

From my view there will be two WTF moments for the appraiser herd: 1-The first will be the realization the talking heads lied about nearly everything 3.6. 2-The cost of the software and the add-ons needed to complete reports will price many out of the business.

 

[alebrewer]

Back to the software providers. I'm not sure why there are no street ready versions yet. But beyond that what is getting lost in the noise (IMO) is the most important question: Pricing.

From I've read only one software hopeful has publicly released a schedule, but as nice as he is he doesn't even have a 2.6 version on the street never mind 3.6. The legacy providers are slow walking any talk of pricing. The new guy on the block is floating a per use pricing that is higher than what any indie appraiser will be able to afford. And before anyone believes pricing will not shoot through the roof, try to reconcile any of them absorbing the costs of a multi-year project.

From my view there will be two WTF moments for the appraiser herd: 1-The first will be the realization the talking heads lied about nearly everything 3.6. 2-The cost of the software and the add-ons needed to complete reports will price many out of the business.

Below is the pricing matrix for Freedom. I remember seeing a comparison analysis for pricing amongst the offerings, and as I recall, they're all gonna be somewhere in this range.