Tagged: FAnnie Mae collateral underwriter
TRID, AMC regulation effects,
I was thinking of starting an “Appraiser Ride” page on the “Wisconsin Appraiser Blog”. I envision it looking something like this. Send your photos and let me know If you want your name on it.
There have been several developments since my last post. HUD has changed the deadline for using the new handbook to September 14, 2015. HUD decided that there are so many changes happening in the mortgage industry that it might be too much for lenders.
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) introduced new Integrated Disclosure rules that amend existing requirements for mortgage disclosures:
Effective with RESPA applications received August 1, 2015, The Good Faith Estimate and Initial Truth in Lending Disclosure will be replaced with the “Loan Estimate” Disclosure. The HUD-1 Settlement Statement and Final Truth in Lending Disclosure will be replaced with the “Closing Disclosure”.
| What is the Integrated Disclosure Rule? | |
| The CFPB was tasked with simplifying the loan process for consumers. In an effort to simplify the loan process the CFPB is combining the Good Faith Estimate (GFE) and initial Truth In Lending (TIL) disclosure into one document which is called the “Loan Estimate”. In addition to combining the initial disclosures; the Final TIL, Itemization of Amount Financed, and HUD Settlement Statement are also being combined into a single document titled the “Closing Disclosure”. | |
| When does the Integrated Disclosure rule take effect? | |
| The new disclosures are required for loans with a RESPA application date of August 1, 2015. If a loan is disclosed with the current GFE/TIL, the loan must close with the current GFE/TIL/HUD. Lenders are not permitted to begin using the forms before August 1st, 2015.
This may have been extended to October. |
|
| Which transactions are covered under the new TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosures rule? | |
| The TILA-RESPA rule applies to most closed-end consumer credit transactions secured by real property. Specifically, the TILA-RESPA rule does not apply to HELOCs, reverse mortgages or mortgages secured by a mobile home that is not permanently attached to real property (i.e., land). | |
| When does the Closing Disclosure have to be delivered to the borrower? | |
| The Closing Disclosure must be delivered to the borrower at least 3 business days prior to closing. | |
| What triggers another 3 day waiting period when a revised Closing Disclosure is issued? | |
|
|
| What is the process if circumstances change on the transaction that will impact the Closing Disclosure? | |
| All parties must notify Closing Department immediately so it can be determined if the changes require a new 3 day waiting period or if the revised Closing Disclosure can be delivered at closing. | |
What does this mean for Appraisers?
The new loan estimate is not allowed to increase and they are required to make a distinction between an appraisal and an AVM or HVE. The loan estimate is not allowed to increase compared to the closing disclosure. If the lender under estimates the cost of the appraisal, they may want you or the AMC to eat the difference. Since they have to have the closing disclosure 3 days prior to consummation of the loan, getting the appraisal done the day before closing will not work. There may be more rush appraisals, even though AMC’s have turned all appraisals into rush appraisals. Remember when we were paid a rush fee to get an appraisal done in 48 hours? Now that is the industry standard imposed by AMC’s. Read more at http://www.wolterskluwerfs.com/tila-respa/frequently-asked-questions.aspx
For those who have AMC regulations things are happening.
First Enforcement of C&R Fee Provision: Louisiana Makes History
by Isaac Peck, Associate Editor
Nearly five years after Dodd-Frank set forth rules regarding Customary & Reasonable fees (C&R) for appraisers, an agreement last week between a state board and an Appraisal Management Company (AMC) is the first evidence of enforcement. The bottom line for appraisers is that they may be finally on their way back to customary and reasonable fees.
On June 4, 2015, the Louisiana Real Estate Appraisers Board (LREAB) issued a Stipulations and Order Memorandum (SOM) wherein Coester Appraisal Management Group, also known as Coester VMS, offers no admission of guilt but agrees to follow the current Louisiana fee schedule for a period of 12 months and pay $5,000 in administrative costs. Coester also will submit Quarterly reports to the Board for a period of 12 months, which list “all appraisal orders in Louisiana, the fee paid and the date payment was made to the appraiser.”
In the Final Order obtained by WRE under the Freedom of Information Act, Coester agrees not to contest the case while simultaneously alleging that, “it (Coester) complied with the federal law, and as such, it was in compliance with Louisiana Law.” In contrast, the Louisiana Board alleges that “Coester Appraisal Management Group did not use established fees set by an objective third party or use the factors set forth” in Louisiana law, in determining fees paid to appraisers.
Tammie Daugherty posted this on LinkedIn
This information was provided by the Network of Appraisal Organizations. It includes just over 20 state appraiser organizations of which my appraiser association, NCREAA and ICAP are members.
Here is the Facebook page for the Network of State Appraisal Organizations. If your state appraiser organization is interested in joining us to unite as one strong voice of appraisers, you may reach the network organizer Peter Gallo at (704)752-6252 ext 101, or at peterg@homesightllc.com.
https://www.facebook.com/stateappraisalassociationworkgroup?fref=ts
✦ILLINOIS HAS CANCELLED OVER 70 REGISTRATIONS FOR AMC’s DUE TO NON COMPLIANCE✦
So now the AMC’s know you don’t mess around with Illinois. 🙂
The State of Illinois has cancelled AMC registrations for over 70 companies effective immediately because of non-compliance with the AMC Act regarding Bond Requirements.
Section 1452.80 Bonding Requirements
The bond required by Section 50 of the Act shall be for a term concurrent with the term of the registration, commencing with registrations issued by the Division with an expiration date of December 31, 2014 and concurrent with the 2-year term of each renewed registration thereafter. This provision does not prohibit the registrant from maintaining a continuing bond during any registration term. Failure to maintain the bond and to provide the Department with written proof of the bond, upon request, shall result in cancellation of the license without hearing.
ICAP has been asked to notify appraisers that they can’t accept work from an unregistered AMC. The following is a list of the current registered AMC’s which was posted on the States website.
http://www.idfpr.com/realestate/AMCRegistrants.pdf
The State will allow appraisers to complete any appraisal assignments received from an AMC that has been removed from the list up through today, May 8th. The link below is the list of AMC’s who have had their registration cancelled. I would strongly suggest you forward a copy of this alert to any AMC you work with if their name is on this list.
http://www.idfpr.com/realestate/NONCOMPLIANTAMCsConcurrentBondIssue.pdf
The last link below is a copy of the letter the State sent to all AMC’s who hadn’t provided their updated bond information when they renewed their license this year. This letter was sent on March 30th. It warns those AMC’s that they must comply by May 1st or risk cancellation of their registration.
http://www.idfpr.com/realestate/3302015ConcurrentBondEnforcementLetter.pdf
This does not mean that an AMC who has had their license cancelled cannot reapply with the State.
The CU Monster is Coming January 26th
The Monster is Coming Soon! (January 26) Do You Know What Your Adjustments Are?
Once upon a time in the land of Homeownership a great rumor spread throughout the land, “The CU is coming! The CU is coming to devour appraisers!” No one knew if it was true. The people pondered. Will it kill deals? Is it coming to eliminate all of the appraisers so the AVM can become king? Some say it is coming to eliminate non conformists so everything will be the same and promote a master race of appraisers, able to justify their every adjustment.
There seems to be a lot of wondering what this will do in the end. It all sounds like more work with no pay with tons of coercion in the end to conform to what a computer says. Can we battle a computer program when we cannot even see what data it is using? Do you really want to try to explain why you did not use the comps that the computer picked, Why you used a $35 adjustment when all of the other appraisers used a $25 adjustment in that same neighborhood? Here are some of the things others are saying.
Here is what Phil Crawford from the “Voice of Appraisal” has to say about it.
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:
“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.
If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property – until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
Check Out This Video. You will Enjoy it. It is a couple of realtors and their take on the CU. They think that loans will be delayed, only low appraisals will get approved, and that appraisers will have to do a lot more work for free.
http://thenationalrealestatepost.com/appraisal-time-bomb-coming-in-january-2015/
Info from Fannie
• Adjustments to Comparable Sales Policy Update
Fannie Mae has eliminated the 15% net and 25% gross adjustment guidelines and provided clarification with respect to expectations for the appraiser to analyze the market for competitive properties and provide appropriate market-based adjustments without regard to limits on the size of the adjustments.
• Introducing the CU CheckPoint
To help prepare lenders for using Collateral Underwriter (CU), the CU CheckPoint was created to provide implementation tips and milestone targets. CU is an appraisal risk assessment tool that will provide real-time feedback on appraisal submissions starting Jan. 26, 2015.
Here are some realtor quotes taken from Realtors on linked in.
“Appraials will take longer, cost more, and will be more of a desk top type appraisal. They could cost up to $1,000. Purchase prices will probably be kept low, thus not allowing the market to grow.”
“We have a new challenge to keep our focus on real estate results, as others busily undermine our hard work, destroy the peace of mind of the Buyer & Seller, and add to the complexity of purchasing real estate. It is sad to see this occur when our real estate world is already too complex, continually dictated by the Government, and now deliberately made more complex than it should be. The American Dream becomes even more distant.”
“I have so much questions on this but, I guess I will just have to wait to see how things will truly affect a transaction after January. To use up to 20 comps for a price comparison on a purchase is basically using an average price per sq.ft. within a designated radius in a selected area (it’s almost liked using the Tax Assessed Value). If this is true, cheaper houses will win over those with higher price per sq.ft. and appraisers would need to pay a special attention to any upgrade(s) and specifically note every one of them to justify their value (I will suggest to all Sellers to provide a list of upgrades for the appraiser to review).
All in all, knowing Fannie Mae’s appraisal algorithm for property selection and procedures in an appraisal challenge in this new method is the key. At this time, I will advise to all Realtors to prepare yourself with a mortgage company with a strong appraisal review board. It will definitely be more attractive to a Seller than those without! Does anyone know if the NAR is interested taking on this issue at a higher level?”
Appraiser Quotes on linked in
“As an Appraiser, let me suggest that you seek lenders that hold their own loans and do not depend on fanny. This proprietary information is not known to me therefore I am not responsible for compliance with this information. This information has not been vetted and is therefore not usable.
This appraiser has no knowledge or access to the data source used by underwriting and is not responsible for data gathered by sources that are not available to the appraiser.
This appraiser retains the total and complete right to decide which comparables are the closest most similar comparables to be used in any and every appraisal performed. Any attempt by underwriting to dictate which comparables are used in a violation of Dodd Franks Appraiser Independent Requirements (AIRS).
For all of these reasons there will not be any further analysis performed by this appraiser to address the use of comparables that were not used in this appraisal. Any further attempt to control the use of comparables will be reported to an attempt to influence the appraiser and a violation of AIRS requirements.
Yes A battle is coming between underwriting and appraisers. It is in the best interest of NAR to get involved with this issue at all levels. Do you understand that as soon as I state undue influence or and attempt to influence the appraiser, No loan can be written. We will only get beat up so much before we blow the deal by stating that there is an attempt to influence the appraiser by underwriting. And this is an attempt to influence the appraiser. Many people who I have spoken with say that will answer any reasonable requests for clarification. However if they get crazy with this the “Attempt to Influence” complaints will sky-rocket and no loan can be written if the appraiser states he is being influenced in any way. MAKE NO MISTAKE, THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE APPRAISER AND IS IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW.
Why is this information being kept from appraisers? They are sharing it with underwriters but will not share it with appraisers?”
“I think one thing we can all agree on is that this is yet another tool that will be a yardstick to beat us with. AMC’s and lenders are not going to do a whole lot of work when they see a high rating. They are going to first assume that our appraisal could have been better. We are being pushed into a corner as I see it. NO ONE is going to pay us more so we can take extra time to jump through CU hoops. The argument will be the same as the 1004MC. That the “extra work” is just something we should be doing already. I say bring it on. I feel I complete good appraisals and when they come back at me with some rating info I will deal with it then. I just hope everyone understands that Skynet v1.0 launches soon and will eventually be as good or better than us on about 90% of all appraisals. The other 10% are the ones you wish you could pay the client $100 to take back anyway. We have NO lobby and the banks and FNMA will eventually get what they all really want. That is an inspection done the same day ordered by a runner who takes photos and measurements, then a 90 second AVM that used 63 sales and listings with a 10 year history of the market area to create an awesome report. In many cases they won’t need the measurements because ours are being added to the database with every appraisal. I work alone and have a database of ~14,000 comp photos and several thousand comps spanning a decade. I also have thousands of appraisal files on individual homes….. Imagine what they have already.”
Here is some info from the National Association of Appraisers as far as some of the things they will be looking for:
Click to access Collateral%20Underwriter%20-%2012%2022.pdf
Risk flags inform the lender that there may be
1) policy compliance issues (UAD issues, property eligibility, etc.)
2) over-valuation risk (using statistical modeling – no value will be provided, just risk scores)
3) an appraisal quality risk (mechanics & methodology used – data integrity, comp selection, adjustments, and reconciliation)
The risk scores, risk flags and messages do not affect the UCDP (portal) submission, but are only warnings to inform during the appraisal review process.
Within the Appraisal Quality section, CU will analyze
– Data Integrity – are physical attributes and transaction terms accurate reported?
– Comp Selection – are the selected comps representative of the subject property?
– Adjustments – Are adjustments based on typical market reaction (not rule-of-thumb)?
– Reconciliation – Are most relevant comps given most weight in reconciliation?
CU will provide detailed messaging with each of the components to help lenders identify potential issues that will lead to a high risk score.
Fannie Mae has stated that, through their portal, they have seen over 14 million appraisals to date and have over 20 million comparable transactions. Fannie Mae states that of comparable sales they
have in their database, they see each one on an average of 5 times. So, data needs to be consistent when using a comparable sale more than once. Data is also checked for consistency among peers.
Example: If your report states that Sale 1 has a sale price of $220,000 and other appraiser peers have used the same sale in other appraisals with a sale price of $200,000, this conflicting
information would raise a risk flag. Fannie Mae has said that they will not flag small differences in gross living area or cases where appraisers are split between C3 and C4 condition ratings for the
same property. Fannie Mae is looking for material differences and outliers.
When selecting Comparable Sales, CU can only score those fixed items on Page 2 of the URAR. All UAD-standardized features are considered. Amenities such as pools, outdoor kitchen, accessory
units, fireplaces, fences, out-buildings, etc. are not recorded in standardized format. Thus, these cannot be considered by the CU model. Since Fannie Mae has access to over 20 million sales,
physical similarity, distance, and time (most recently sold) will be scored. There may be cases when a lender will come back to the appraiser asking why certain sales were not used in an appraisal.
Fannie Mae has said that in almost every appraisal report they see, there is a comment that says “The appraiser used the most comparable sales available.” If the risk score is too high, lenders may
question if this is a true statement made by the appraiser.
In the Reconciliation, CU is looking to see that the appraised value is within the adjusted sale price range provided by the comparable sales. Example: Opinion of Value is $250,000. Range of the
Adjusted Sale Prices: $200,000 to $225,000. Fannie Mae is on pace to receive 20,000 appraisal reports where the opinion of value is outside the range. CU will check for those appraisals where
there is a wide range of values with support being from a single comparable. This may be justified, but CU will look in order to validate. CU will look at the lower and upper range of values from the
comparable sales. CU may provide a higher risk score and messaging so that the lender may address the issue. This may mean having a conversation with the appraiser.
What can appraisers do in preparation of CU?
Brush up on appraisal methods and techniques
Have supported/market based adjustments – the days of using standard adjustments that were handed down or you were told to use by your supervisor are gone
Be able to explain how you developed your adjustments
Don’t use the same adjustment for all appraisals (unless you can support it).
Example:
$25 sf GLA adjustment for $75,000 property…as well as a $750,000 property.
Be consistent with your comparable sale data. If you used Q3 previously….stay with that. CU will flag the same comp used by you having different data.
If your data differs from MLS, public record data or any other source, provide explanation why the data differs from your research.
Be aware of your comp selection and adjustments. Include support for your adjustments.
Provide support for why you went “that far” to get a comp. Fannie Mae
There are many that have been appraising longer than I, but in my 23 years, appraisers have been predicting the end of our profession since the day I started. Fannie Mae buys loans. So, they get to make the rules for the loan they purchase. If you want to play their game, you’ll have to learn their rules. If you are an appraiser that provides sound, credible work, this is just another curve-ball being thrown at you. If not, you might need to learn how to hit a curve-ball.
The CU Monster is Coming
Yes Daniel there are monsters in our world. They have been lurking in the shadows for years. Fannie Mae has let them loose on us and will release their own CU monster on January 26th. If you thought you were a good appraiser, you will find that you have no defense against the massive CU monster who will rip your appraisal apart, adjustment by adjustment, comp by comp.
Download Blue Little Monster Graffiti Free Unique Wallpaper | Full HD Wallpapers
I watched the Bradford Redstone video also at https://goto.webcasts.com/starthere.jsp?ei=1050667
I have also seen a demonstration of the SAVVI analytics program, which looks similar and is also in the Total store if you use alamode. Here is link to their demo info http://www.savvianalytics.com/#!need-help/c13kd
Both of these look similar to the Fannie CU Monster. I am sure that more programs will come hoping to fight the CU big data monster. This is another great opportunity to make more money off of appraisers. The main issue is the big data problem. In most markets around here you are lucky to have 6 comps and most of these regression based programs need 200 comps or more to be accurate. I think who ever can overcome this issue the most successfully will be the most successful in the creation of the most popular monster. User friendliness will also matter. Either way we will have to pay for big data analytics. Any appraisal software that includes it for free will probably garner the majority of appraisers.
Sounds like Fannie will be throwing out all of the guidelines they have created in the past in favor of big data with 50-90% gross adjustments. The bigger and grosser the monster the better. Unless you are using an AVM to do your appraisals like Fannie, your appraisals will be flagged as a risk filled appraisal. If you thought you already received too many stupid revision requests wait till the 26th. We may have to throw out everything that we have been taught by our peers to make it in this profession unless we all bail on mortgage work, which in the end may be what they really want anyway.
The Redstone video shows a vision of the future of the appraisal industry. A drone flies out and takes a photo of the property, which is recognized by a property data base and satellite imagery geo coding the property, which taps into all of the home depot, lumber yards, building permit hubs, and other stores related to improving a property to analyze what types of improvements have done and the satellite measures the GLA and fills in the subject information. Then the monster analyzes every sale in the county, selects the most similar comparables, puts them in the appraisal, makes the adjustments, throws in all the stats to support the adjustments and why you did and did not use those sales, and spits out the most likely value.
I think Fannie is going to create a plethora of USPAP violation and Appraisal Independence issues. USPAP requires that In developing a real property appraisal, an appraiser must: be aware of, understand, and correctly employ those recognized methods and techniques that are necessary to produce a credible appraisal. So what happens when Fannie says that your adjustments are wrong because they don’t match up with theirs? They will have to say that you are incompetent and do not know how to correctly employ recognized methods and techniques unless you can prove how you came up with those adjustments. That brings up the question as to is the CU monster a recognized technique or method. Does anyone use AVM adjustments in their appraisals? Would a peer review accept a $150/sq. ft. GLA adjustment on a $200,000 house? Is the CU an appraisal review even if they do not give a value? Does it require a geographically competent appraiser? Can a computer program perform an appraisal review? What will it do to the brains of the check box monkeys?
I love it when an AMC requires that you include Fannie’s own AIR statement in an appraisal that states the following and sends back a 2 page revision request for all of the other things that they want you to put in the appraisal that violates the statement. It seems that Fannie is in violation of their own statement.
- Appraiser Independence Safeguards
- An “appraiser” must be, at a minimum, licensed or certified by the State in which the property to be appraised is located.
- No employee, director, officer, or agent of the Seller, or any other third-party acting as joint venture partner, independent contractor, appraisal company, appraisal management company, or partner on behalf of the Seller, shall influence or attempt to influence the development, reporting, result, or review of an appraisal through coercion, extortion, collusion, compensation, inducement, intimidation, bribery, or in any other manner including but not limited to:
(1) Withholding or threatening to withhold timely payment or partial payment for an appraisal report;
(2) Withholding or threatening to withhold future business for an appraiser, or demoting or terminating or threatening to demote or terminate an appraiser;
(3) Expressly or impliedly promising future business, promotions, or increased compensation for an appraiser;
(4) Conditioning the ordering of an appraisal report or the payment of an appraisal fee or salary or bonus on the opinion, conclusion, or valuation to be reached, or on a preliminary value estimate requested from an appraiser;
(5) Requesting that an appraiser provide an estimated, predetermined, or desired valuation in an appraisal report prior to the completion of the appraisal report, or requesting that an appraiser provide estimated values or comparable sales at any time prior to the appraiser’s completion of an appraisal report;
(6) Providing to an appraiser an anticipated, estimated, encouraged, or desired value for a subject property or a proposed or target amount to be loaned to the Borrower, except that a copy of the sales contract for purchase transactions may be provided;
(7) Providing to an appraiser, appraisal company, appraisal management company, or any entity or person related to the appraiser, appraisal company, or appraisal management company, stock or other financial or non-financial benefits;
(8) Removing an appraiser from a list of qualified appraisers, or adding an appraiser to an exclusionary list of disapproved appraisers, in connection with the influencing or attempting to influence an appraisal as described in Paragraph B above (this prohibition does not preclude the management of appraiser lists for bona fide administrative or quality-control reasons based on written policy); and
(9) Any other act or practice that impairs or attempts to impair an appraiser’s independence, objectivity, or impartiality or violates law or regulation, including, but not limited to, the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and Regulation
We’ll have to get together in February and discuss how the CU has enhanced our profession.
Last Appraiser Lunch for this Year / Collateral Underwriter
Looks like this will be our last lunch of the year at Legends sports bar. It will be Wednesday November 19th at noon at Legends. There have been some things developing concerning appraisers since the last lunch.
Our topic a couple of meetings ago was supporting adjustments. I would say that we did not come up with anything real helpful. The $29 class from OREP How to Support and Prove Your Adjustments is a good class for the money but it makes you want to take the 10 hour course. It addresses supporting adjustments. Here is why you need to know.
Fannie and Freddie have created the Collateral Underwriter program using all the data that we appraisers have collected for them in the last 2 years using the UCDP UAD process. It sounds like they have created an analytical program that will analyze our appraisals and show the user what each adjustment should be, which compatibles should have been used, and if your appraisal is reasonable.
Will they let us use this data or program? It does not sound like it. It sounds like the plan is to use it to eliminate more appraisers by adding to the black list. They are going to make it available to lenders so they can analyze our reports for risk. I don’t want to be a nervous Nelly, but this sounds like even more endless revision requests based on what a computer says for the same low fees.
It also sounds like they may make it available to AMC’s. If they would make it available to appraisers, we would have another tool to help our analysis, which would eliminate the need for the lenders to have it because we would be able to make our appraisals fit into their box. It is our data I think we should be the first to get to use it. Odds are if they let us use it they will charge us money for it.
Fannie is going to use their review analysis to determine if they will accept appraisals from certain appraisers anymore. In the end we will all have to learn about computer run comparable analysis in order to dispute or support their collateral underwriter analysis. Each appraisal will have to be based on multi line regression analysis with charts and graphs for each adjustment in your appraisal, which in and of itself is fine. Who would not want to have a well supported appraisal able to withstand a legal dispute or Fannie blacklist attempt. The only issue is that they are still going to try to get us to do this $1,000 appraisal for $200.
What are we going to do? A couple of thoughts would be to get together and make sure we all know how to support every adjustment. If any one has a special knack for computer run analysis, share with the rest of us. Lets all be part of the Appraisal Data Evolution. How are we going to get paid a reasonable fee for the work? Got any ideas? Since we barely have the supply and demand thing going with lenders any more after It was put into the hands of the AMC’s by those who decide our fate. Since we are not allowed to discuss fees. Since no one wants to pay for an appraisal. Since we do not have a collective voice. Since we can’t seem to get every appraiser to stop accepting low fees. Since AMC’s want to make as much money as possible off of us. How will we survive? What can an appraisal coalition do to help? For those states who have instituted customary and reasonable fees, will they have to reanalysed the fees every year or every time Fannie changes something?
Einstein said, “Nothing happens till something moves”. Does anyone have a solution?
Below are some excerpts from the Fannie site about the CU.
Fannie Mae will make CU available at no charge so lenders can take full advantage of the application for quality control and risk management purposes.
Fannie Mae will provide access to the web interface for Fannie Mae Sellers and their correspondent customers to support in-depth appraisal analysis.
Perform in-depth analysis using CU’s dynamic web-based interface that includes comparable sales data, market trends, mapping, aerial photography, public records, and other functionality to assist with manual review of the appraisal.
How are the CU risk scores, flags, and messages different from the current Proprietary Fannie Mae Messages in UCDP?
The Fannie Mae Proprietary Messages in UCDP are rules-based alerts focused on data reasonableness, and property eligibility and policy compliance. CU is model-based and performs a more comprehensive analysis of data integrity, comparable selection, adjustments, and reconciliation.
CU leverages an extensive database of property records, market data, and proprietary analytical models to analyze key components of the appraisal including data integrity, comparable selection, adjustments, and reconciliation.
Q16. Is Fannie Mae providing information about CU to appraisers and AMCs?
Fannie Mae’s appraisal policy and strategy teams regularly communicate with the appraisal community through participation in industry events and outreach to key industry groups. Information about our efforts to improve appraisal quality has been shared with the appraisal industry for the past few years, dating back to 2008 when we initiated appraisal data standardization efforts. Information about CU is being provided to the appraisal community in the fourth quarter of 2014.
We are reaching out directly to AMCs regarding the CU implementation and inviting them to leverage our training resources to learn more about it.
All of these articles in their entirety can be found at https://www.fanniemae.com/singlefamily/collateral-underwriter
http://www.fanniemae.com/portal/about-us/media/corporate-news/2014/6182.html
Fannie Mae (FNMA/OTC) announced that it will make its proprietary appraisal analysis application available to lenders in early 2015, allowing lenders to compare appraisals against Fannie Mae’s database of appraisal and market data. The company currently uses the tool, Collateral Underwriter™, to analyze appraisals when a lender delivers a loan to Fannie Mae. Collateral Underwriter will help lenders expand access to mortgage credit by providing increased certainty around repurchase risk
Fannie Mae began receiving appraisals in electronic format from lenders in 2012, and built Collateral Underwriter to analyze that data. Collateral Underwriter leverages Fannie Mae’s market data and analytical models to perform a comprehensive assessment of the appraisal. The tool provides an overall risk score and detailed messaging to highlight specific aspects of the appraisal that may warrant further attention. Collateral Underwriter will be integrated with Fannie Mae’s Desktop Underwriter® software to seamlessly incorporate into a lender’s existing underwriting process. Using Collateral Underwriter during the origination of the loan will allow the lender to assess the appraisal and address any issues prior to closing and delivery to Fannie Mae.
Wisconsin Appraiser 