Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Terrible real estate agent photographs

terriblerealestateagentphotos.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–346 of 346 posts

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#341

Post by mcv »

InCityDreams wrote: post #53
jahsome wrote: post #16

An acquaintance of mine is an FBI investigator and moonlights as a higher-grade Realtor. He would use the same memory card and high end camera both during "stakeouts" for surveillance photos as well as listing photos for the homes he was selling. One day he uploaded the entire contents of the memory card to the MLS on one of his public listings, surveillance photos and all. I'm pretty sure everything was up for a few…

>An acquaintance I know is an FBI investigator and moonlights as a higher-grade Realtor. I really, really, really tried my best, but the only appropriate i could think of was "Fucking hell!". Are you sure they're not a realtor masquerading as a....well, at this point, who gives a shit?

No, it's a very practical combination. Let's say you're investigating a murder, talking to the wife of the victim: "I'm sorry for your loss. Is there anything else you can tell us about what happened? And I can totally understand if you can't bear to live alone in this crime scene any more. In fact, if you want to move out, I know someone who would be interested."

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#342

Post by vGPU »

robocat wrote: post #316
hinkley wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our old house had problems. When we listed it, the best prospect thought we were stupid not honest, so he kept trying to get us to lower the price when inspection turned something up. In retrospect maybe a picture with the proverbial roof on fire might have been a good idea. Here's the thing about getting a house loan: If you try to buy a house for too far under or over market value and can't explain why it's that fa…

In New Zealand, houses can be sold “as is” which means cash only. It usually means that insurance cannot be acquired for the house, and mortgages always require insurance. It means there are bargains still available in my city (Christchurch) because there were so many houses damaged by the earthquake a decade ago. There are still houses that are about 2/3 the price compared to similar insurable houses. Few people can…

All used homes in the US are sold “as-is”. It’s caveat emptor doctrine.

Now, there are laws against misrepresentation. There is a disclosure form that is required which asks you about defects. The seller can admit them or decline to answer, but if the seller knowingly lies about a property defect you can sue to recover damages.

Real estate agents have a lot of liability here because they are bound to disclose things that could have been “reasonably known” - which is a definition that can be tortured in every direction. For example, bedrooms: in my state a bedroom must have a closet to count as a bedroom. Except sometimes it doesn’t have to have a closet to count as a bedroom. The exceptions are literally described as “some older homes had bedrooms without closets” - but “older” and “bedrooms” is left to the interpretation of your legal council and the investigator when it becomes an issue.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#343

Post by wpietri »

reaperducer wrote: post #317
wpietri wrote: post #297

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would you say it wouldn't stand up in court? As long as the agent shows up to say, "Yes, I took these photos of real things that happened," that strikes me as the heart of the evidence.

Because companies like Canon sell multi-thousand dollar cameras and attachments to police agencies that are designed to make sure photographs can't be tampered with so that they're admissible in court. There can't be the possibility that a rogue cop altered a photograph, or the case can get thrown out. It's why the cameras police departments use cost 5x more than the consumer versions.

I'm not sure "government agency buys expensive thing" is proof of actual need of said expensive thing. And even if it were, it's not clear to me that the need applies in this case.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#344

Post by TheHappyOddish »

dreen wrote: post #31
junon wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is incredible given some of the listings. The fact one of the pictures is the house on literal fire, coupled with this context, goes to show that some people really don't belong anywhere in marketing or sales.

And it got sold! I happen to remember this https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64389615 I suppose leading with a picture of it actually on fire is better than a post or pre fire photo.

> The pair - natives of North Manchester in the United Kingdom who now live in Houston, Texas with their three children - had been searching for homes near Nashville, Tennessee when they came across the property.

Why is the BBC clarifying what country Manchester is in but omitting where Tennessee is? Very strange for a British publication.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#345

Post by whynotmaybe »

convalescindrey wrote: post #322
whynotmaybe wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What puzzles me the most is that some people have no trouble doing dangerous DIY like fixing their lawnmower with some duct tape but are scared of selling their house because "legal stuff". Real estate agent are always hitting the nail with the message that we won't have to worry if we hire them. And because of that message, people have a tendency to think that selling is worrying. If you are genuinely worried with t…

Every apartment and house I've bought up to this day in my life (and I've moved quite a lot over the decades) would have been almost an impossible sale by the owners themselves. Their realtor was able to present the place, reply with empathy (that is, understood where I was coming from and what my interests are) and get back to me with important info about the property and district that the owners themselves usually…

Just like I said, they can be helpful to a few individuals, but they're not really the embodiment of helpers in the community that they often present themselves like.

Re: Terrible real estate agent photographs

#346

Post by asdff »

mikeg8 wrote: post #328
asdff wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does photoshopping furniture all over the flooring and walls count? I've seen plenty of that, seems standard actually since now you don't need to pay for staging.

Digital staging always looks a little off though. Also, open houses. If planning on an open house, which can be very beneficial, paying for staging may be worth it. Was for me at least.

Depends on the market, but in hot demand markets I'm sure its not necessary at all when you are getting 10 offers over ask sight unseen and sales with no inspections.
Post reply on HN