ACI Sky Causing Distress for Appraisers
- Federal Valuation Agency Impact on Appraisers & the Public - July 22, 2022
- Is Georgia Going Rogue? - June 13, 2022
- Bias in Automated Valuation Models - February 28, 2022
Are you giving in to ACI Sky?
An appraiser who will remain anonymous tells us…
“within the last week, I have had two issue of concerns with “UAD” compliance and ACI Sky Delivery ( I can hardly write that; as, it is a significant source of stress when I have to deal with it). I have tried to submit reports, with issues that prevented the upload (no surprise with “Sky”). The first involved the 1004MC form. The comparables that were available for the subject were extremely minimal – something like 4-6. The last period only included 1 comparable (no valid data). The trend indicated “increasing”. However, in our area, the trend is really demonstrative of “stable” at this time. The trend on page 1 of the U.R.A.R. indicated “stable”. There was explanation on the 1004MC form as to why the trends did not match. The representatives of the company associated with the order indicated that they had to “match”. I related that they did not, based on minimal data for comparables specifically, with an explanation as to why they didn’t necessarily match. As, page one represents the subject’s area market, and 1004MC is representative of comparable specific data. They insisted that I just use general market data for the 1004MC, so that they would match. In order to be compliant for USPAP and not be misleading, I included two 1004MC forms, with an explanation of why two were associated. However, they insisted that I remove the comparable specific form. In the end, I did not and they finally processed it. This brings up concerns, as noted, in that “conforming” to these processing software systems will, in a lot of cases, be misrepresentative, and ultimately we are appraising to the review/processing systems and not necessarily a true representation.
The second scenario was with an REO property. The “as is” value + the estimated cost for the repairs was not equal to or greater than the “as repaired” value. Well, no kidding. This is often the case, depending on what the repairs are, etc. It would not go through the system on this basis. Ultimately, I did not change the report. However, it is an ongoing concern with regard to what is happening by these software review processing systems and the insistence that we conform to “make it work”.
This appraiser goes on to say
“ACI Sky is a delivery system for AMC’s. I work with several who use this system. It provides the companies ‘pre-screening/review’ for reports being submitted. The point here is that anyone that encounters this system will have the same responses. I have had other companies indicate that page 1 of the URAR and the 1004MC have to match. But, again, this is not always the case in reality.
I am not concerned with being compliant with USPAP, because I either do not comply with what they are requesting, or at least make a disclaimer in my report regarding the factors associated. I am concerned with how many appraisers out there may be giving in to the system? More and more AMC’s are utilizing the ACI Sky delivery system; and, there are other systems that cause similar upload issues. These systems cause immense frustrations, as they prevent uploads multiple times, and don’t always give the same error each time. As one of my colleagues related, dealing with these systems make you want to throw your computer across the room”.
So appraisers, the question is are you having similar difficulties with ACI Sky? If so, please comment and we will contact them and advise them of these issues.
ACI is “a leading innovator and provider of software solutions in the valuation industry for thirty years, has brought advancement and technical achievements to mortgage servicing that led to the complete automation of many paper-intensive reporting processes” and are coincidentally NOW owned by First American / Corelogic.