Anonymous wrote:Feels dishonest. Makes one wonder what else is being mis-represented.

Caveat emptor?

Feels dishonest. Makes one wonder what else is being mis-represented.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Photo 2 of this one has an entire fence photoshopped in, but in reality there is zero fence on the property: https://redf.in/cJjXUT

I think that crosses the line and should be considered false advertising.

This house is on a busy intersection so it isn’t selling. So far the photoshopped fence hasn’t convinced anyone to buy it.

Looks like they are having an open house tomorrow.

They’ve been on the market 138 days and have had 30-40 open houses. They overbuilt and overpriced for being at a busy intersection; would have sold in 3 days if it was a few blocks back on a side street.

Listed by Elizabeth Lucchesi • Long & Foster Real Estate, Inc.
•703-683-0400 (broker)
•Source:BRIGHT MLS #VAAX2027876

House hunters, call and ask about the fence. Make Elizabeth earn that commission.

Violation of Article 12, SOP 12-10 specifically.
Report this to the NVAR Real Estate Association, at a minimum.

What can be reported to the board of realtors?

Anonymous wrote:Photo 2 of this one has an entire fence photoshopped in, but in reality there is zero fence on the property: https://redf.in/cJjXUT

I think that crosses the line and should be considered false advertising.

This house is on a busy intersection so it isn’t selling. So far the photoshopped fence hasn’t convinced anyone to buy it.

Looks like they are having an open house tomorrow.

That house (which was discussed here a while ago) is just an egregious example of lying on a listing. Photoshopping fences that don't exists is simply unethical, and as a buyer I would be pissed if I went to the showing and saw that I was lied too.

Not surprised it's still on the market, if the seller is unethical enough to lie about something that basic, wonder what else they may lie about. Lol seems like they massively reduced the price too

I get paid per hour and if I went to see this house based on a fraudulent inducement I would ask for my hourly rate on the spot. You lied to me, that will be $2250. Thanks.

I think that green grass/photoshopping out neighboring structures for the main photo of the house is fine - we all know they're trying to put their best foot forward, but some of the other things people have described (putting in a fence or landscaping that don't exist!!) should not be allowed. I also don't love "virtual staging" but if they do it, I think they should be required to have a watermark or note on the picture that it is virtual staging because we all know they make the furniture tiny to make the room look larger in virtual staging photos.

A couple years ago, I noticed that a neighbor’s listing included a line of bushes and trees that didn’t exist that hid another neighbor’s carport. At the time I assumed it had been done for the sake of the neighbor’s privacy, but now I wonder if it was so prospective buyers wouldn’t realize that many of the neighboring houses have carports instead of garages.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Photo 2 of this one has an entire fence photoshopped in, but in reality there is zero fence on the property: https://redf.in/cJjXUT

I think that crosses the line and should be considered false advertising.

This house is on a busy intersection so it isn’t selling. So far the photoshopped fence hasn’t convinced anyone to buy it.

So that metal and stone fence doesn’t exist?!

I’d report the realtor to the licensing board. How is that any different than adding a beautiful pool and hardscaping? Or putting in an entirely different kitchen?

Unless the purchase price includes the installation of that exact fence before closing, I’d say it’s extremely unethical to include in pics.

Greener grass, that’s fine. Fuller trees - depends on the type of tree and location, but that’s moving toward shady practices.

Yes, i drive by it every day and the fence does not exist.

Not going to report it because I’m not an agent and don’t care enough about it

Anonymous wrote:Photo 2 of this one has an entire fence photoshopped in, but in reality there is zero fence on the property: https://redf.in/cJjXUT

I think that crosses the line and should be considered false advertising.

This house is on a busy intersection so it isn’t selling. So far the photoshopped fence hasn’t convinced anyone to buy it.

So that metal and stone fence doesn’t exist?!

I’d report the realtor to the licensing board. How is that any different than adding a beautiful pool and hardscaping? Or putting in an entirely different kitchen?

Unless the purchase price includes the installation of that exact fence before closing, I’d say it’s extremely unethical to include in pics.

Greener grass, that’s fine. Fuller trees - depends on the type of tree and location, but that’s moving toward shady practices.

Photo 2 of this one has an entire fence photoshopped in, but in reality there is zero fence on the property: https://redf.in/cJjXUT

I think that crosses the line and should be considered false advertising.

This house is on a busy intersection so it isn’t selling. So far the photoshopped fence hasn’t convinced anyone to buy it.

Wondering what people know about altered/doctored real estate pictures. I see impossibly green lawns (compared to reality), neighboring structures photoshopped out with extra leafy trees, angles from drones that show waterfront past the tree line. Are sellers of less than perfect properties getting desperate?