PREDICTIVE ASSET RANKING SCORE OF PROPERTY

• US 20080255862A1
• Filed: 04/11/2007
• Published: 10/16/2008
• Est. Priority Date: 04/11/2007
• Status: Abandoned Application

• Current Assignee: Gregory A. Bailey, Williams J. Paul
• Original Assignee: Gregory A. Bailey, Williams J. Paul
• Inventors: Bailey, Gregory A., Williams, J. Paul
• Application Number:
  US11/734,110
• Publication Number:
  US 20080255862A1
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/1
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 40/06 Asset management; Financial planning or analysis

Abstract

The predictive asset ranking system and process quantifies the condition of major components and sub-components of a property based on a systematic comparison of one major component against another utilizing analytical hierarchy analysis. The predictive asset ranking may be expressed as a value or score that may be used as a benchmark to compare one property to another property. The predictive asset ranking process applies multiple analytical hierarchies to the various attributes of a property. The analytical hierarchy may be based on an attribute weighing process and may include a series of qualitative questions indicative of attributes of the property. The predictive asset ranking system may be dynamic and may be customized for the particular asset being evaluated. When the system is customized, the process may automatically recalculate the weights and redistribute the points used in the predictive asset ranking analysis.

Claims

1. A system for predictive asset ranking of property comprising:

a database receiving and storing attribute data for components of said property;

a processor that accesses said database and applies multiple analytical hierarchies to said component attribute data;

a component ranking generated by said processor for each of said components of said property, said component ranking indicative of an overall condition of each of said property components;

an overall ranking generated by said processor comprising an aggregate of said component rankings, said overall ranking indicative of an overall condition of said property;

an output system producing said overall ranking of said property to a user.

2. The system of claim 1, wherein said processor applies multiple analytical hierarchies to said component attributes in order to derive said component rankings, wherein said hierarchies are based on an efficient attribute weighing process that assigns a weighed ranking to each of said components based on responses to a series of questions relating to said component attributes.

3. The system of claim 1, wherein said predictive asset ranking system is dynamic and allows customization of said predictive asset ranking system through selection of components for inclusion in deriving said overall property ranking.

4. The system of claim 3, further comprising component software modules, wherein each component module comprises one or more levels of sub-component software modules, wherein each component and sub-component software module comprises a series of standard qualitative questions describing attributes of said component or sub-component.

5. The system of claim 4, wherein said selection of a component loads said component software module for inclusion in deriving said overall property ranking, including all of said sub-components and qualitative questions under said selected component.

6. The system of claim 4, wherein non-selection or de-selection of said component causes said component software module not to be loaded or unloaded from said derivation of said overall property ranking, including all of said sub-components and qualitative questions under said non-selected or de-selected component.

7. The system of claim 1, wherein said components further comprise major components and sub-components, wherein said major components may be selected from the group comprising:

site and landscape;

hard surfaces;

site drainage;

roofing system;

building envelop;

insulation and ventilation;

interior finishes;

appliances;

HVAC;

plumbing systems; and

electrical systems.

8. The system of claim 1, wherein said component ranking further comprises a numerical sub-value or sub-score that numerically quantifies a condition of each of said components of said property.

9. The system of claim 1, wherein said overall ranking further comprises a numerical value or score that numerically quantifies a condition of said property.

10. The system of claim 9, wherein said numerical value or score further comprises a numerical score range, wherein the higher the numerical score, the higher the ranking of said property, and the lower the numerical score, the lower the ranking of said property.

11. The system of claim 10, wherein said numerical score range further comprises sub-ranges comprising textual descriptions of conditions of said property.

12. The system of claim 1, wherein said overall ranking further comprises a quantitative score derived from a series of qualitative questions relating to said component attributes using an analytic hierarchy process.

13. The system of claim 1, wherein each of said components is assigned a maximum possible sub-value or sub-score such that an aggregate of said maximum possible numerical sub-value or sub-score is equal to a maximum possible numerical value or score for said property.

14. The system of claim 1, wherein each of said components is assigned a weighed value used to determine said component ranking, wherein an aggregate of said component scores is equal to said overall property ranking that is possible for said property.

15. The system of claim 1, wherein said analytical hierarchies comprise Pairwise analytical hierarchies.

16. The system of claim 1, further comprising an input system for inputting said attribute data for select components of said property.

17. The system of claim 16, wherein said input system further comprises an electronic device that displays a list of possible components for evaluation, wherein said input system receives selections of components to be evaluated, wherein a series of qualitative questions pertaining to each of said selected components is displayed, and wherein said input system receives responses to said qualitative questions pertaining to attributes of said selected major components.

18. The system of claim 1, wherein each of said components comprises one or more sub-components, wherein a series of standardized and qualitative questions exists for each sub-component for capturing conditions of attributes of said sub-components.

19. The system of claim 18, wherein each sub-component is assigned a weighed value used to determine a sub-component ranking, and an aggregate of all sub-component rankings under each component is equal to said component ranking assigned to said component.

20. The system of claim 1, further comprising a hierarchical progression, wherein said hierarchical progression comprises:

said overall ranking comprising an overall total of possible points for a property, said overall total of possible points to be distributed over a plurality of components of said property based on a comparison ranking model;

said component ranking for each component comprising an overall total of possible points for said component, said overall total of possible points for said component to be distributed over a plurality of first sub-components under each of said components, each of said components to be compared for relative importance to each of the other components based on an attributes weighing process and comparison ranking model;

a first sub-component ranking for each first sub-component comprising an overall total of possible points for said first sub-component, said overall total of possible points for said first sub-component to be distributed over a plurality of second sub-components of each of said first sub-components, each of said first sub-components to be compared for relative importance to each of the other first sub-components based on an attributes weighing process and comparison ranking model; and

a second sub-component score for each second sub-component comprising an overall total of possible points for said second sub-component, said overall total of possible points for said second sub-component to be distributed over a plurality of third sub-components of each of said second sub-components, each of said second sub-components to be compared for relative importance to each of the other second sub-components based on an attributes weighing process and comparison ranking model.

21. The system of claim 20, wherein said attributes weighing process and comparison ranking model comprises a Pairwise attribute weighing process and comparison ranking model.

22. The system of claim 1, wherein said property is a single family residential home.

23. The system of claim 1, wherein said output system further comprises a database and/or a report comprising said component rankings of conditions of said components and said overall ranking of said property condition.

24. The system of claim 23, wherein said report provides an assessment of present condition and needs of said property, and future repair and replacement needs of said property.

25. The system of claim 23, wherein key data and data points from said database and/or said report may be mined, analyzed, packaged and sold to specific list markets to be used as a predictive tool in determining whether to take an action relating to said property.

26. The system of claim 1, wherein said overall property ranking may be used as a benchmark to compare one property to another property.

27. The system of claim 1, wherein said overall property ranking may be used as a predictive asset ranking tool in one or more facets of a transaction involving said property.

28. The system of claim 27, wherein said overall property ranking may be used as a predictive asset ranking tool by one or more of:

sellers, purchasers, realtors, brokers, advertisers, mortgage providers, mortgage insurance providers, hazard insurance providers, home warranty providers, real estate appraisers, and secondary markets.

29. A predictive asset ranking method comprising:

providing components of a property that may be selected for evaluation;

weighing a relative importance of each component as compared to said other selected components;

assigning points to each selected component based on said weighing;

presenting a series of qualitative questions relating to attributes of each of said selected components;

receiving responses to said qualitative questions indicative of a condition of said component attributes;

calculating a component point value for each component;

deriving an overall point value for said property by aggregating said component point values; and

outputting said overall point value that is indicative of an overall condition of said property.

30. The method of claim 29, further comprising:

applying multiple analytical hierarchies to said component attributes; and

basing said analytical hierarchies on an attribute weighing process.

31. The method of claim 30, wherein said attribute weighing process further comprises:

comparing said component attributes in pairs to judge which of each pair is preferred, or has a greater amount of some quantitative property; and

basing said analytical hierarchies on an attribute weighing process of Pairwise comparisons.

32. The method of claim 29, wherein said predictive asset ranking of said property is performed at time of listing of said property for sale.

33. The method of claim 29, further comprising making said outputting said overall point value available to one or more of:

a buyer, a seller, a real estate agent, a broker, a mortgage company, a mortgage insurance company, an insurance company, a lawn care company, a pest control company, a second lender.

34. The method of claim 29, further comprising providing a standardized report format wherein said standardized report includes said outputting said overall point value that is indicative of an overall condition of said property.

35. The method of claim 29, further comprising:

customizing said predictive asset ranking method for a particular property being evaluated by allowing a user to select components to be evaluated and included in said derivation of said overall point value for said property.

36. The method of claim 35, further comprising:

automatically recalculating said weighing a relative importance of each component based on said selection of said components; and

redistributing points associated with a non-selected component over said selected components that are applicable to said property being evaluated.

37. The method of claim 29, further comprising:

converting said responses to said qualitative questioning to a quantitative score by using an analytic hierarchy process.

38. The method of claim 29, further comprising:

using said overall point value as a benchmark for comparing said property to other properties.

39. The method of claim 29, further comprising:

adjusting said overall point value based upon a geographic region in which said property is located to account for regional factors that may impact said property.

40. The method of claim 29, further comprising:

determining a relative characteristic worthiness for said property based on one or more of said component point value and/or said overall point value for said property; and

making said characteristic worthiness available to property service providers for use in making a relative characteristic worthiness assessment.

41. A real property data collection and scoring system comprising:

components of a property selected for inclusion in said data collection and scoring of said real property;

weights assigned to each component for weighing a relative importance of each component as compared to other components;

points that are assigned to each selected component based on said weighing;

qualitative questions relating to attributes of each of said selected components;

attribute data received in response to said qualitative questions, said attribute data indicative of a condition of said selected components;

a point value calculated for each component based on said attribute data; and

an overall point value derived by aggregating said component point values, said overall point value being indicative of an overall condition of said property.

42. The real property data collection and scoring system of claim 41, wherein said component attribute data may be mined, analyzed, packaged and sold to specific list markets.

43. The real property data collection and scoring system of claim 41, further comprising a hierarchical progression, wherein said hierarchical progression comprises:

said overall point value comprising an overall total of points for said property, said overall total of points for said property to be distributed over a plurality of components of said property based on a comparison ranking model;

said component point value comprising an overall total of points for each of said components, said overall total of points for each of said components to be distributed over a plurality of first sub-components of each of said components, each of said components to be compared for relative importance to each of the other components based on an attributes weighing process and comparison ranking model;

a first sub-component point value for each first sub-component comprising an overall total of points for each of said first sub-components, said overall total of points for each of said first sub-component to be distributed over a plurality of second sub-components of each of said first sub-components, each of said first sub-components to be compared for relative importance to each of the other first sub-components based on an attributes weighing process and comparison ranking model for score points; and

a second sub-component point value for each second sub-component comprising an overall total of points for said second sub-components, said overall total of points for said second sub-component to be distributed over a plurality of third sub-components of each of said second sub-components, each of said second sub-components to be compared for relative importance to each of the other second sub-components based on an attributes weighing process and comparison ranking model for score points.

44. The real property data collection and scoring system of claim 41, further comprising:

an estimated useful life (EUL);

an estimated age;

a remaining useful life (RUL); and

a percent EUL depleted, wherein said EUL, said estimated age, said RUL, and said percent EUL depleted contribute to said points that are assigned to each selected component having an EUL.

45. The real property data collection and scoring system of claim 44, wherein said EUL represents an adjusted score (“

component score”

column plus “

percent EUL depleted”

point contribution), said estimated age is a sum of said percent EUL depleted for all components; and

said RUL is a sum of said percent depleted EUL for all components times an average of said percent depleted column.