I doubt the thought process in the risk department has changed in relation to valueing future possible changes (DA) to properties in todays estimate of value. If that were the case, you wouldnt need a no val policy, just have the assessor ask the valuer for the DA val rather than the current one.
No val policies arent designed to get around pesky credit policies, they are designed to save the bank the cost of a valuation.
Pete can speak for himself, but I read his post about a property without a laundry meeting the no val policy, only in a sneaky way, which he doesnt condone. Im sure if he had known the property didnt have a laundry and that lender required it for lending, he wouldnt have submitted the security under their no vals policy....
In terms of other lenders that have a no val policy, theres quite a few under 80, and at least one under 90%, however they all get vetted in some kind of algorithm by the assessor, and sometimes the no val turns into a kerbside or a full val at the credit officers discretion.
No val policies arent designed to get around pesky credit policies, they are designed to save the bank the cost of a valuation.
Pete can speak for himself, but I read his post about a property without a laundry meeting the no val policy, only in a sneaky way, which he doesnt condone. Im sure if he had known the property didnt have a laundry and that lender required it for lending, he wouldnt have submitted the security under their no vals policy....
In terms of other lenders that have a no val policy, theres quite a few under 80, and at least one under 90%, however they all get vetted in some kind of algorithm by the assessor, and sometimes the no val turns into a kerbside or a full val at the credit officers discretion.