Comments on: FNMA Big Data to Check Appraisals https://appraisersblogs.com/appraisal/fannies-new-collateral-underwriter-to-check-appraisals-using-fannies-big-data/ Appraisal News and Tips for Real Estate Appraisers Sun, 11 Feb 2018 05:05:45 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=7.1.2 By: Matt https://appraisersblogs.com/appraisal/fannies-new-collateral-underwriter-to-check-appraisals-using-fannies-big-data/#comment-11437 Sat, 10 Jan 2015 23:05:24 +0000 https://appraisersblogs.com/?p=6675#comment-11437 I Understand that this Process is confidential, “… FNMA Collateral Underwriter Flyer showing info about the FNMA Collateral Underwriter process they will make available to lenders (NOT APPRAISERS)…” Why not? If their info is so extensive, so complex, so enigmatic why not run the analysis and give it to the appraiser up front? We’re in the age of sharing data open source freely, right? Why not? The assignment would read something like, “…we’ve run our analysis (by a bunch of high powered specialized statisticians not one of which knows everything there is to know about the process) and this is what we found out — now go out, take a look at the subject, the interior, the condition, the area, the nearby properties etc. and tell us what you think… ” A simple, direct, no nonsense approach where everybody that has an interest in the accuracy of the result contributes their bit. Why all the inane secrecy – unless there is a hidden agenda somewhere??

]]> By: Mike Ford https://appraisersblogs.com/appraisal/fannies-new-collateral-underwriter-to-check-appraisals-using-fannies-big-data/#comment-11375 Sat, 08 Nov 2014 23:45:38 +0000 https://appraisersblogs.com/?p=6675#comment-11375 I have no objection to legitimate internal checks and balances by any client.

What I DO have concerns about is being asked / directed to reconcile MY property data to some unknown “peers” data without having a full and complete copy of that “peers” data (appraisal report), so that I can see and understand the context in which that data was reported as opposed to my own.

There is a reason why appraisal review has its own specific compliance standard rule under USPAP. This proprietary CU does not conform to that USPAP Standard Rule (SR 3).

With respect to ‘Chain of Title issues’ THAT is not my responsibility. That is what title insurance is for. My ‘scope’ in this regard is researching within the normal course of business, as would be customary by my peers. Different commercial reporting services sometime provide different transactional histories.

Simple refinance transactions within a family can show up as “sales” due to title company recommended use of grant deeds versus quit claims, when a stronger credit family member is put on title to better qualify for a loan. Again, NOT my job to analyze prior refinances lending and title issues.

Checking adjustments. IF it is ONLY the math, I have no problem with it. IF it becomes a metric for measuring the propriety of an adjustment, or the amount of an adjustment, then FNMA first needs to demonstrate that THEIR software is a reliable market value indicator in the specific market being considered.

Checking comp applicability is a review appraiser function. It is NOT a software scoring function. Too may times appraisers have been told comps “closer” than those used should have been selected based only on proximity, when it turn out those comps were outside city (sub market area) bounds!

IF ‘big picture” databases were reliable, then all one would need is the national median price information attached to a local size related multiplier, in order to arrive at “value”.

FNMA and software gurus have never accepted that this cannot be done and keep reworking the software and its descriptions in an effort to achieve that which we already know is impossible.

]]>