Appraisal News and Business Tips

Reviews

8-23-18 Newz//Schizophrenic Adjustments – Neighborhood Names – Appraisal Disputes

Neighborhood Names That Attract Wealthy Buyers

Excerpt: You may be able to judge a neighborhood by its name. Some neighborhoods containing certain names tend to attract the wealthiest residents and boast the highest home values, according to a new study by Porch.com, a home improvement resource.

Neighborhoods that include names like “Hills,” “Island,” and “Village,” for example, tend to report some of the highest average household incomes in the country. On the other hand, the lowest home values were found in neighborhoods with words like “Fort,” “Junction,” and “Rock” in their names.

In the richest neighborhoods, researchers found places that had names using the words “Village,” “Valley,” and “Heights” tended to exceed $100,000 in average household incomes. For example, in Texas, 22 neighborhoods and communities that contained the name “Village” had average household incomes of more than $174,000. Colorado and Michigan communities that contained the word “Village” in the name also contained some of the states’ wealthiest residents, too.

My comment: Neighborhood name adjustments?? I wonder how CU handles this?
——————————————————————————

Read more!!

10-12-17 Newz//FHA-Appraisers responsible for water quality reporting?, Hybrid appraisal survey

New CU 4.2 makes it easier for lenders to change comp and subject data. MI companies can access CU

Excerpts: During the weekend of Dec. 9, we will implement Collateral Underwriter® (CU™) 4.2, (which includes) the ability to edit the subject and appraiser-provided comparable sales property characteristics. CU 4.2 will also provide mortgage insurers (MIs) with access to CU. Lenders will be able to give their MI risk partners access to appraisal-specific data by providing them the Doc File ID generated at the time of appraisal submission.

Comparable Sales Review Edit Feature
The ability to edit subject and appraiser-provided comparable sales property characteristics (currently available via the pencil icon in classic CU) will be added to the Comp Review page. Clicking on the pencil icon in the Edit column of the comparable sales review table will open the Edit Property Characteristic pop-up. If there are data errors or missing data elements, the edit feature can be used to modify the data elements and rerun the model with the revised data.
Click here to read the full release
My comment: Lenders have been able to change subject and comp data and now it will be easier? I didn’t know that they are able to change the data now. MI companies have access to CU? What about appraisers?

Read more!!

CU – subject vs. comp data. I want the subject data!!

Fannie says that typically there are around 7 UAD records per property. However, most of them must be from appraisers who used it as a comp. Why should we be compared with appraisers who used the property as a comp?

I want access to CU property data from appraisers who did an appraisal on the subject property, not from appraisers who used it as a comp. I want CU to use this data to compare my appraisal data with “peers”. Comp data is not very reliable as it usually comes from MLS and public records. Fannie says that MLS and public records are not as reliable as data from the appraiser who appraised the property for the sale.
Maybe the appraiser had seen the interior of the comp recently, but this is very unlikely. Also, I go on the MLS tour/caravan almost ever week, but I don’t spend a lot of time at each open house. Well..I do spend more time if there is good food ;> MLS photos are subject to interpretation as they are done for sales purposes. I make brief notes on the flyers and file them in binders, going back to 1990.

Appraisal Today newsletter

Appraisal adjustments "The Dirty Little Secret"

A Few CU Factoids
– Not all loans go to Fannie – VA, FHA, jumbo, etc.
– Fannie guidelines, including CU, are the minimum. Lenders can add their own, even keeping 15-25% adjustments.
– Lenders are not required to use CU.
– CU sends out appraisal warning messages for adjustments on: GLA, lot size, view, condition, quality, and location. For now.
– Gradual implementation of CU’s web based interface, which has the infamous “20 comps”, mapping, etc. Not available to AMCs.
A few CU comments and opinions from me:
I need a Book of Adjustments!!! Maybe a few of Fannie’s will “leak” – wiki leaks ;>
– AMCs are now asking for adjustment support from non-CU adjustments. More Scope Creep??
– Mass confusion on what gets sent from underwriter to AMC to appraiser – warnings, Risk Scores, etc.
– The recent Fannie Letter to Lenders about CU said that the intent is not to overwhelm appraisers with warning messages. But, are underwriters going to read (and understand) 30+ page appraisals? I’m glad I’m not an underwriter!!
– How to respond to warning messages – not clear.
– Requests from AMCs include CU and non-CU requests. Sometimes hard to tell where they are from.
Adjustments – the “Dirty Little Secret” of Fannie Form Appraisal Reports
I can’t think of any time a client asked me for my support on an adjustment prior to CU. They have been accepting the usual responses, which are in many boilerplates: Based on my many years… or matched paired sales… etc.

A critical issue to me is that the dollar adjustments seem to indicate that residential appraisal values are precise and very accurate, which is not correct. There are lots of factors affecting home sales as compared with income property such as apartments and commercial property.

I have asked many very experienced appraisers how they “support” adjustments. Most use “rules of thumb”, such as using a percent of price per sq.ft. for GLA. But, this number includes land. Or, they use adjustments they were given when they were new appraisers. Of course, if you only appraise conforming homes in conforming tracts built in the past 10 years, it is much, much easier.
For now, CU only sends out warning messages for these adjustments: GLA, lot size, view, condition, quality, and location. This is a very small percent of all the UAD coded data. Plus, some data is not UAD coded, such as pools. But, many state regulators expect to see support for all adjustments in your work files.
We all need a Book of Adjustments ;>
Of course, all of us have adjustments that we have accumulated over the years, or recently developed. But, with CU we are being compared to peer and model adjustments. Of course, no one tells us who or what they are. Sometimes appraisers are given this information.
Regression to support adjustments
Regression will not work for all adjustments. It works well in conforming tracts less than 10 years old. After that, it goes downhill. This has been shown many times for AVMs. I really wish I could just buy regression software and have it calculate them all for me!!
Using qualitative adjustments
I did my first SFR appraisals this week without not making any dollar adjustments when I use form reports for non-lending work. I did make time adjustments (which are very easy to support) as the effective date was June, 2014, when prices were increasing rapidly in my market.
I used plus and minus signs in the grid. I use the 2005 Fannie forms but do not use the Fannie certification or limiting conditions. I use my own.
For awhile in the late 80s or early 90s Fannie had a form with pluses and minuses, so I had some experience. Also I don’t use dollar adjustments in my 5+ unit apartments or commercial appraisals.

Appraisal Today newsletter

Appraisers not getting access to their own data on CU

There is a petition and a letter being circulated about appraisers getting access to CU, particularly the Web interface which lists comps. This is unlikely for many reasons, which I write about in my paid newsletter.

More important (and more likely to occur) is: Why don’t appraisers get access to subject and comp physical characteristics from the CU database, which was provided by appraisers using UAD?

For example, which appraisers are able to measure their comp GLAs? Not many. This data would really help appraisers do better appraisals. We can always look at MLS interior photos and interview agents, buyers, and sellers for other information we need, such as condition. When the MLS listing says “contractor special” or “fixer” that is a good indicator of condition.

The only reason I have heard is that appraisers vary widely and there are too many differences. GLA is a good example. This has has always varied among appraisers. When I used the old CMDC appraiser database in the late 1980s, sometimes there were more than one source of GLA on a property. I have done relocation appraisals since 1986. It was very seldom that the 2 or 3 appraisers have the same GLA. The “rule of thumb” was up to a 5% difference in GLA was ok.

How many appraisers are “fudging” their dimensions to make their GLA match public records and avoid “stips”? Hopefully, CU will change this. Maybe CU will notice how many appraisers just use public records and how many use their own measurements.

I am really hoping that Fannie allows appraisers to get property characteristic information. It will help all of us – Fannie, lenders, AMCs, appraisers, reviewers, etc.

Appraisal Today newsletter

Fannie warning letters – GLA adjustments and lots more coming

Fannie warning letters-GLA adjustments

Fannie has been sending out warning letters to appraisers about variations in Q and C ratings. Now they are sending out letters about using low GLA adjustments. According to people who attended, or heard about a recent speech that Bob Parsons of Fannie Mae gave an appraisal conference, $25 per sq.ft. Seems to be used by lots of appraisers for lots of properties that vary widely in size, etc. I wasn’t at the speech and don’t know what was actually said, but $25 per sq.ft. Was used in a large number of appraisals.

A quote from a recent email I received: “A friend of mine just got a letter from Fannie Mae stating that they have been monitoring his reports for 6 months. In that time they said he used $35 Psf for gla adjustments 14 times. This is a warning. Further action may be required if this continues.” I haven’t seen any of the letters myself but have been hearing about them for a few months. This The last two sentences have been pretty common in the warning letters sent about Q and C adjustments, which are a lot more shakey to support and are much more controversial.

Hmm… In my area, the San Francisco Bay Area, with a median home price of $601,000 in October, 2014, slightly down from June as many markets have slowed down. San Franciso’s median home price is around $1,000,000. I hope no one there is using $25 per sq.ft.!! Except maybe in neighborhoods with relatively low home prices or some lower priced condos condos. In my small city of 75,000 population the median price in October 2014 was $690,000. Our prices are around the median for the area. Very few homes or condos under $300,000.

Sq.ft. is one of the easiest adjustments to support, as compared with lots of other features. For many years, it has been one of the few almost always reliable adjustments when using regression analysis. You can sometimes even use matched pairs. I have no idea why appraisers don’t try to figure out an appropriate adjustment.

This is just a start. Read info on Fannie’s UCDP Fannie Mae Appraisal Messaging Change Notification” – link below, with a list of all of the appraisal data that Fannie is looking at below.

——————

Dave Towne on Collateral Underwriter
Thanks to appraiser Dave Towne (again) for his Most Interesting Comments:

Appraisers……..

Many know by now that the GSE’s…primarily FannieMae……..have instituted a new ‘appraisal scoring’ procedure based on an electronic read of your reports ……….. specifically on a SFR 1004 or the Condo 1073Those are the only forms currently being analyzed by the CU process.

On Nov. 18, 2014, FNMA released a document named “UCDP Fannie Mae Appraisal Messaging Change Notification” which you can find here:  https://www.fanniemae.com/content/release_notes/ucdp-change-notification-01262015.pdf

I encourage all appraisers to actually read this document … all 11 pages.

When you do read this document, you will learn that your reports are being compared to your peer’s reports, and to your other reports, and to some unidentified ‘model’ FNMA uses.

Some of the ‘checks’ being performed by the CU process include these:

The reported GLA is materially different than what has been reported by other appraisers.

The reported lot size is materially different than what has been reported by other appraisers.

The condition rating is significantly different than what has been reported by any other appraiser.

The quality rating is significantly different than what has been reported by any other appraiser.

Here are a few that can cause real concern among appraisers:

The GLA adjustment is larger than peer and model adjustments.

The GLA adjustment is smaller than peer and model adjustments.

The view adjustment is materially different from peer and model adjustments.

And I just love this one:

The appraiser-provided comparables are materially different than themodel-selected comparables.

It’s time for appraisers to get serious about meeting your peers in person, compare notes, and develop a regional adjustment chart for all variables … much like that yellow legal pad paper you were handed when you got in this business …. that paper with the ‘required’ adjustment amounts on it for almost all items.

Oh … and when you get that knuckle slapping letter from FNMA saying your adjustments or comparables don’t match the ‘model’ be sure to get the specifics and pass on ‘model info’ to your peers.

Yep, appraising real property and developing an opinio

My comment: Fannie, please send me all my adjustments. Then I won’t get questioned by my state regulator (hopefully), underwriters, reviewers, etc. I would really like to know what adjustment to be made for all the unusual features in the homes I typically appraise – most built before 1930 and many built before 1910 with all types of additions, remodeling, etc. Even tract homes have stuff like converted garages, original kitchen and baths, inlaw units in rear, views, etc. Of course, I have been using regression since the 1970s on homes and very few adjustments are very reliable. I wonder how Fannie is going to do it.

I remember commercial appraisers used to talk about getting cap rates from bottom of a stone monument ;> Maybe we are still looking for that darn piece of stone!!

————————————-

Dave Towne on Big Data, Hedonic Regression, etc.

Appraisers………

The new Collateral Underwriter electronic review process developed by FannieMae has many appraisers on edge. This will become the ‘ultimate authority’ or gold standard for reviewing appraisal reports as of January 26, 2015 …. at least as far as FNMA is concerned. Your reports will either ‘pass’ or ‘fail’, depending on many factors. Some of those factors are outside your immediate control.

“Big Data” is one giant pile of stuff that is being put into the CU pot, stirred together like a stew. Except there is no master chef involved that ‘we’ can interact with. Instead we have a bunch of secret sous chefs each contributing a chunk of meat, a bit of spice, some chopped carrots, and a few potatoes. None of them, or us, really knows the actual CU recipe, because part of what’s in the stew is a ‘model’ of something unknown. But some of that Big Data in the CU stew could be yours … or it might be data provided by your peer appraisers who work in your area – that your reports will be compared against. Not too tasty you say? Just add more pepper.

An aspect of this Big Data stew is Census Tract home price analysis, which is compared against your appraised property value. As an exercise, everyone reading this immediately write the neighborhood description using N, S, E & W directionals for the census tract in which your home residence is located. What? You don’t know the boundaries of your census tract? For shame! Some people using the CU stew might think you are deficient because you don’t know price trends in the exact census tract of the appraised property.

Then we have Hedonic Regression. It’s not a bad thing. But it’s becoming the buzz words of our appraisal adjustment process. It’s a ‘background component’ in the CU process, moving farther forward, faster than some might expect.

Bet you didn’t know that the adjustment grid is a form of Hedonic Regression! It’s a way a certain property’s components of value are itemized separately. By using Hedonic Regression, the individual value of the adjustable components can be calculated and plugged into the adjustment grid. In theory, this can lead to a more accurate property value.

The folks at Bradford Software were among the first to begin promoting use of regression techniques by appraisers. In other ways, the other appraisal software companies and some independent developers have been working on individual processes to make “Regression” more palatable and useful to appraisers. Bradford, and the independent developers, have either report software, or separate spreadsheets, that can help calculate property adjustable components, which in turn can lead to a more credible and supportable opinion of value for the appraised property.

The days of “I’ve been an appraiser for 27 years, so I know what this house is worth” are rapidly coming to an end. The Big Data CU stew is overtaking appraising like the snow avalanches that have closed State Highway 20 in north Washington State in the Cascade Mountain range, not far from where I sit in my cozy bathrobe and bunny slippers.

My observation in this process is that appraisers, as a group, are not statisticians by training and are somewhat scared of that term – even though ‘we’ deal with lots of statistics and data. Thus, appraisers don’t have a clear understanding of what “Regression” is, or does. As a result, ‘we’ have been reluctant to embrace this ‘actually old’ technology in modern appraisal reports. And ‘we’ certainly are skittish about FNMA’s soon to be released (to lenders only) Collateral Underwriter which will analyze reports using “Regression.”

Another perspective on this topic is from this blog: http://www.housingwire.com/blogs/1-rewired/post/32165-does-fannie-mae-support-appraisers  This one is written by one of the regression spreadsheet developers, currently available to appraisers.

And for info on Hedonic Regression: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_regression

My comment: When I first started doing residential lender appraisals in 1986, we used census tract maps to find the code. Later, the codes were available on computers and we did not use maps. However, I found that they were very good for defining neighborhoods. I guess we all forgot about them since few, if any, appraisers look at the maps. I still have my old census tract books.

Appraisal Today newsletter

Lender and AMC revision requests

Lender/AMC revision requests
By Steve Costello
Source: AppraisalPort monthly newsletter

My comment:  www.appraisalport.com  recently redid their web site and somehow their surveys got put on another page. Now, they are back. AppraisalPort has my Most Favorite Appraisal Surveys!! The current poll is about what measuring device appraisers use. Be sure to vote!! Their poll responses were typically very high, 4,000 to 6,000 responses.

——————-
Full article below:

First, I am glad to report that the poll is back up and running on the AppraisalPort homepage. It was down for a few weeks during the transition to the new version, but you can now find it by either scrolling down a bit or by just clicking on the button that says “Weekly Poll” on the right side of the screen.

This month, I want to discuss a couple of recent polls related to lender/AMC revision requests. First we asked: “Compared to a year ago, my lender/AMC revision requests have…?” Out of the 5019 responses, nearly 40 percent went with the answer “Stayed about the same.” Unfortunately the second most popular answer of “Increased significantly,” which took 21 percent of the vote and was followed closely by “Increased somewhat” with 19 percent. These were followed by the responses of “Decreased somewhat” pulling 13 percent of the vote and finally, “Decreased significantly” with a 7 percent share. There are two ways we can look at this data: Taking a negative view, 40 percent of the appraisers are experiencing some kind of increase in revision requests. That is a big number, but looking on the positive side that means that the other 60 percent have either stayed at the same level or have experienced a decrease in revision requests.

In the second poll we asked: “On average, how much time do you spend making and delivering requested revisions on any given appraisal?” We had a total of 4870 responses to this poll. Nearly half (48%) of those chose the response of “10-30 minutes.” This would seem about right for most minor to moderate revisions. Many must be making pretty minor revisions because the second most popular response with 24 percent of the vote was “Under 10 minutes”. Another 18 percent are having to take a bit more time and went with the choice of “31-60 minutes.” A smaller group of 7 percent is having to invest some real time to make the revisions and picked the response of “Over an hour.” The final 3 percent selected the answer of “I don’t make revisions.” I’m not sure if that means they are doing an amazing job on every report and never get a request or if they just refuse to do any revisions!

My comment: these results are somewhat similar to the recent Valuation Review survey results. I keep hearing lots of complaints about revision request hassles. It is good that it seems to be stablizing. Interesting results. I hardly ever have revision requests from my estate clients, except when I have a typo on the address or client name ;> I really hate getting reviewed!! Well… maybe it would be okay if it is an experienced local appraiser who knows all about my market!! I have always wondered why lender appraisals have been regularly reviewed. I don’t know of any other profession where someone else reviews so many reports that are done. I really think this is why appraisers are so negative about other appraisers’ work. I can’t remember if I took the poll… I often don’t because I don’t do any lender work and it sorta skews the results…

What do you think? Post your comments below!!

Appraisal Today newsletter

Standardizing adjustments?

Channeling Deep Blue Versus Garry Kasparov in Home Valuations – It’s time to standardize how real estate appraisers make their adjustments

Source: Corelogic blog

Excerpts:
It might be time to reengineer the process appraisers use to make adjustments to comparable homes. The current approach does not appear to be defensible.

To investigate this issue, we obtained a set of relocation appraisals from an appraisal management company and conducted our own analysis. (As background, for relocation deals, two or more appraisals are ordered at the same time; and the two appraisers often choose an identical comparable property).

For the experiment, we:
1) Obtained a set of relocation appraisals—two appraisals on each property prepared at roughly the same date for which the appraisers choose an identical comparable.
2) Looked at the adjustments made to that comparable and noted discrepancies in the amount of the adjustments, and even the direction (positive or negative).

It’s time that we re-engineer the process so that appraisers can focus on the things that may benefit from the human element, such as defining the neighborhood and selecting comparables. But for the pieces of the puzzle that need to be standardized, like adjustments to comparables, we should be harnessing the power of our machines. Too much is at stake to maintain the status quo. Appraisers would benefit by being allowed to focus on things they do well; loan applicants would benefit from a less-costly, streamlined process; and lenders would benefit from valuations that were standardized and more reliable.

Read the full article and see how they analyzed the data, with graphs etc. at:
http://www.corelogic.com/blog/authors/michael-g.-bradley/2014/10/channeling-deep-blue-versus-garry-kasparov-in-home-valuations.aspx?WT.mc_id=crlg_131016_0OGMz#.VFERojTF8zr

My comments: of course, it would be very helpful if appraisers had access to all the Big Data being compiled by Fannie and Others. Fannie will be looking at appraiser adjustments but don’t offer any help from their Big Data to appraisers making the adjustments.

Appraisal Today newsletter

Fannie's new Collateral Underwriter to check appraisals Using Fannie's Big Data.

Fannie’s new Collateral Underwriter to check appraisals Using Fannie’s Big Data. 

Another great email from Dave Towne in Washington!!

10-14 FNMA Collateral Underwriter Flyer showing info about the FNMA Collateral Underwriter process they will make available to lenders (NOT APPRAISERS) in January 2015. You should review it. It has to do with their Enhancement of Risk Controls.

This is what we know as Appraisal Quality Monitoring (AQM) …. which was announced almost 2 years ago. FNMA has already been using the ‘scope’ on your reports, but will soon allow the lenders to have access to the software so that they can do pre-submittal exams prior to uploading the loan file, and your appraisal, to FNMA.

Virtually everything is digital now in our real estate appraisal world. That makes it incredibly easy for ‘big data’ to be analyzed very quickly and efficiently. Hiding relevant property info under a rock, your clipboard [tablet?], or just ignoring it, is no longer possible. Discrepancies will be found fast, and you will be asked for explanations or corrections.

Note the examples from the flyer:
– Chain of property ownership
– Inconsistency in reported property data from your info compared to your peers (subject & comps)
– Checking adjustments made (or not made) – primarily the math
– Testing for comps in terms of location, characteristics, sales prices, etc.

FNMA’s news release about their Collateral Underwriter:
Introducing Collateral Underwriter
Collateral Underwriter™ (CU™) is a proprietary appraisal risk assessment application developed by Fannie Mae to support proactive management of appraisal quality. CU will:
– Provide additional transparency and certainty by giving lenders access to the same appraisal analytics used in Fannie Mae’s quality control process.
– Perform an automated risk assessment of appraisals submitted to the Uniform
– Collateral Data Portal® (UCDP®) and return a CU risk score, flags, and messages to the submitting lender.
– Be available at no charge so lenders can take full advantage of the application for quality control and risk management purposes.

The CU risk scores, flags, and messages will be available to all UCDP users in real-time beginning on Jan. 26, 2015 through UCDP. Find more information on the CU web page at https://www.fanniemae.com/singlefamily/collateral-underwriter?cmpid=sln102114 .

Dave Towne, AGA, MAA Owner / Educator
360-708-1196
towneappraisals@clearwire.net
www.towneappraisals.com
Mount Vernon, WA

My comments: The PDF only has three pages of the document. The other pages were not available. Real estate is location, location, location. What about the 4th approach to value: Curbside Approach. That is where you sit on the curb across the street from the subject and ask yourself: “Does this value make any sense?”

There are many appraisal review programs in use and being developed. I knew that Fannie would be using their Big Data to automate underwriting reviews of appraisals as well as monitoring appraisers.

Does this mean appraisers focus even more on making sure their appraisals pass these automated reviews rather than focusing on what counts – the value? Is this another path along the way to not focusing on what appraisers provide – reliable and accurate values? Plus, disclosure of any problems with the property?

Appraisal Today newsletter

Review appraiser liability

By attorney Todd F. Stevens

Excerpts:
Here’s a trend in real estate law: attorneys are waking up to the potential liability of review appraisers. Couple this with the common misunderstanding among review appraisers that their risk is less than the author of the original report, and you get a burgeoning new area of litigation. Here’s how to protect yourself.

Another big myth is that reviewers have less liability than the original appraiser. In fact, I have heard some attorneys argue that reviewers have more liability than the original appraiser since reviewers have the “last” opportunity to correct any problems with the report. While I am unaware of any case precedent specifically addressing this issue, logic dictates that the liability of a reviewer and the original appraiser are the same.

My comment: a topic that appraisers who review appraisals don’t like to think about. This article was written several years ago and refers to mortgage brokers, but it applies now. The author defends appraisers.

http://www.keenlaw.com/topics/reviewappraisals.html

Appraisal Today newsletter