Palos Verdes Lifestyle - Norma Toering's Palos Verdes Homes Blog

Norma, What a good topic for discussion.  I hadn't thought of the places where our internet homes are still there & what that means to the new owners.

Maybe this is another disclosure that will be needed for buyers. The information stays on the internet forever.

 Blooming for Maryland home buyers.

I think you did an admirable job.... I think you went above and beyond.

Wow, when we list a property it is out there so I can see where you would have to do some detective work to find all the places.  I wonder what the legal answer to the question is or maybe we have just not went there yet.

Well, I personally do not feel that it will compromise their security at all.  And, I don't feel that we have to go back and undue all the marketing that we did to get the house sold. 

Wow what a tough task.   Not as easy as "Remove Listing", or "Undo".

It is neat to see how well your Internet Advertising worked.

Jen Wing

 

Excellent opportunity for our Gov't to hire another 1,000,000 employees to stop this from happening. If it's not illegal now there will be a new law.

I agree with Maureen, you went above and beyond the call of duty on this one.  Where those pictures ended up is not at all under your control and I don't believe it to be your responsibility to go hunting them down and removing them.  This sounds like paranoia to me.

There are many sites out there that advertise homes years beyond the sale. I am honestly not sure I would have gone so far as you, after all your client was the seller and they gave you permission at the time so the photos are yours, they do not belong to the buyer.

Interestingly our tax offices have photos of the houses and they are publicly available.

I would love to know others perspectives on this. Would it slow down and even stop the online efforts to sell, who knows.

Susan - Exactly what I thought when I received the request--I have to blog about this!

That is a lot of work... and there are some sites that you have no control over~ I post a listing and some other weird sites get it and it grows and grows, yikes.

Roy - One more disclosure is just what we don't need.

Maureen - Thank you--it was a daunting task to say the least.

 

Marchel - I see a new disclosure on the horizon...

Jean - I think most people would not give it a second thought, but new regulations are often passed to satisfy the few, not the masses.

 

Jen- That was the only satisfying aspect of the task!

Daniel - Let's hope it does not take quite that many new employees--but the Internet is vast and infinite...(smile)

Of course, one has no control over all the sites that pick up the information and pictures via IDX.  I can remove sites that I created myself, but, since permission was given by the previous owner, I doubt the new owners have any say about it.  Any legal beagles out there who know?

I am sure this topic can take on a life of it's own.  Where information goes once posted to the internet, is limitless.  Having sellers permission to fax, email and use the internet for marketing is the disclosure.  Removing from the internet once posted may be completely unreasonable with the exception of controlled sites by your business entity.  Would be interesting to hear a legal perspective.  Good post and topic for discussion.

Y'know, this episode reminds me of a "big story" several years ago when people started to realize that durn near ANYONE could look up their phone number or address and (shock, shock) even get directions from any location in the world right to the front door of their home. Big story. Now that folks have seen the impact of Google Street view, or Bings "any angle satellite", I hope they are getting used to the idea that we don't live in the 1950's any more. Good topic for debate, but the reality of our world today is that EVERYTHING is on the net, and somethings are just harder to find than others.

I believe I would promise to remove off my own domains, but would remind the new buyer that the seller gave legal permission for MLS (and others) to post information and photos. "Sorry, that's the best I can do." (I have to wonder if he had his selling agent remove all the photos from the house he just sold. Betcha not.)

Thanks for the excellent post. Something to think about for the future, probably.

Wow! This is a topic that never crossed my mind although I do try to protect my privacy and respect other's privacy.  Nice of you to accommodate the homeowner as much as you could.  The topic gives rise to some interesting questions - not the least of which is 'how much privacy do we really have?'

What did you do for the publicly available sales information? Our P&SA says it will become public information when it closes and include their name, the date, what kind of loan, how much they paid, the tax parcel number and commonly known as address.

 

I had a seller that decided to do a loan mod so we had to take it off the market. He asked me to "take it off of all over the internet". I had to explain, I only put it on about 14 sites. After that it runs away. I would do what I could but no promises. Oh and he wanted it off "Now" so it would not interfere with his modification. 

Great post.

What an interesting topic!  I haven't had any similar requests yet - but can imagine it would be next to impossible to identify all the online locations where that previous listing may appear!  Will be checking back to see if others have encountered this or if anyone knows of a legal opinion on it...

This is not a reasonable thing to ask. To be honest, I would simply say that it is impossible to remove everything from the internet.  THings tend to stay online no matter what you do.   It's an exercise in futility and unless you had dual agency - you didn't represent the buyer.   The reason I would take such a hard line?  I have a business to run. I have had people ask me to change this and that. But the fact is that a blog is a snapshot at a given place and time.  Like a newspaper - the material is dated. If I had to respond to every request to change things around I'd never be able to function in my business.  After all, I have over 500 blogs out there - soon I'll have a 1000.  If I go chasing my tail to change things for people who I don't work for - when will I have time for clients?  Can of worms...nip it in the bud and just say "no."

I have had this request before. And I thought I scrubbed all the sites, I went to the mls, real bird and postlets and changed the status, deleted all the craigslist and facebook ads...this was 7-8 months ago. Last week I got an email that the listing on another site was about to expire. I really don't remember posting that listing there, but it is clear that I did. It was really complicated. SO, I started a documentation page to keep track of every place I post a listing. This has actually turned out to be helpful on MANY levels, especially to show the sellers what all I am doing to market their property.

Its a simple piece of paper I staple to the folder of the listing. Nothing fancy, but it sure has helped me out to track everything.

The way some of these things spread, it would be almost impossible to remember/find every possible place a property was listed.

Norma, just explain to them that once posted on the internet....always on the internet. Period.

This is a great topic and brings up a lot of good points.

I'm thinking we might draft a letter that states that we will remove the property from the mls, our broker's site, and our personal business site and blog, but that further removal is up to the buyer of the property.  Give them the info of how to look up a whois for a domain, provide a little paragraph for them to include in their correspondance, and put the onus on them.

I'm going to discuss it with our broker Friday and get his take on it. Thanks for a thought provoking post!

Norma,

You do the best you can when asked, but you really don't know all the places it lurks. Here in Maryland, its the previous owner of the property that gave written permission to market the property on the internet.

Rich

I think we're going to hear this request more and more.  I remember three years ago (we were all just starting with the internet viral marketing of homes thing), my buyers called me up and said that they saw their home listed For Sale on Zillow.  They were quite anxious, since they had purchased the home 6 months earlier, and thought someone was trying to sell it without their knowledge.  I explained to them that Zillow is slow on the up-take, and that nobody was trying to sell their newly purchased home. 

People like their privacy, and I can understand that.  I always do my best to remove the marketing I've put up, but when it's syndicated, it's difficult to get to everything.  I just recently found a link to a home I sold over a year ago on a music website, since I had used some tunes with the virtual tour.  The site that originated the tune snippet (but not the site I set up the virtual tour on) I used on my virtual tour had the home listing.  Who knew.  Fact is, when we do as much as we can with internet marketing, it really does end up all over the place.  Something to consider long term.

In our employment agreement, the seller agrees (or doesn't) to allow still and video images to be placed on the internet.

The former homeowner gave permission for the online proliferation of those images . . . I would have done the same as you by seeking to remove as much as possible upon request -- because the new homeowner may be your future client.

But as has been stated above in other comments, it's probably not possible to completely eradicate from existence -- and not your responsibility to do so.

I recently 'wiped' a listing the homeowner fibbed he wanted to 'refi'  . . . when I saw the FSBO sign on the property, believe me I did a pretty thorough job! :)

Hi Norma -- Wow, this could get really onerous, especially for an agent with a TON of listings.

Hats off to you, sounds like you went the extra to fulfill the needs and requirements asked of you. Internet market takes on a life of its own once posted. You never know.

I had a request once to "get my house of YOUR website" even though it was marked as "sold" the new buyer wanted it gone.  I removed it entirely although I like having recent sales there for a few weeks.  But he didn't ask and I didn't consider other places the house might be via our mls and other agents within the MLS that might have advertised it.  Hmmm... makes for an interesting discussion and I wonder where the courts would see such a request and/or refusal to comply with it.

In a pre-foreclosure situation, we heard that one bank actually is requiring that all web references to his property (currently listed with a well-known national brokerage)  be removed prior to the new brokerage
 ( that the bank has chosen) taking over the listing. We wonder if this is the future.

Norma,

I wonder if there's a way to remove all links with a simple embed or tags or something?

Norma - very interesting, sounds like you did alot of work to make this person happy.  I have never heard of this happening, but I could see it happening more often.

thanks for sharing this

t

It would be a tough task for sure.  I believe according to our State Law advertising a property that is not currently listed is illegal, and must be removed.  I don't see how they can make a REALTOR(r) responsible for the sites that "borrowed" the photo for their site.

An interesting topic and one I have been thinking about a little lately but from a different angle. Consider that as a listing agent (and given the proliferation of listing information to seemingly everywhere now), you have just put photos and detailed descriptions/information about your clients' home and belongings out there for the whole world to see and as you noted, we may have already lost control of exactly where those listings go. You may have loaded floorplans, room dimensions, detailed notes on whether it has an alarm system, and pictures of expensive electronics or other furnishings. If the house is empty and the pics/description reflect that, would-be thieves know they can show up and steal appliances with little interference. Many sites have detailed maps of the general area (and if they don't, Google maps is a click away).

More to your specific point, I'm not so sure the buyer/now owner doesn't have a legitimate gripe (and I don't mean that as a swipe at you but just at the idea in general). Yes, the seller agreed to have the house plastered everywhere but the buyer did not. Now here it is 3 months or 6 months or a year later and pics of the house are still on the Internet. If it were you, wouldn't you want that info removed from public consumption?

Like I said, I think it is an interesting topic - we've rushed full steam ahead with the power of viral marketing for houses but the scope of the issue may be greater than we thought.

Norma - It sounds like you put a lot of effort into this and that there were some sites on which this information was posted over which you had no control.

did they also request you travel throughout the world to destroy all printed copy you used to market the property?  I just did a Let Me Google That for you presentation to show my client how viral my marketing is.  I put in the units exact address in quotes.

1000+ hits.

reminds me of an old sign.  has to do with P & ool's

once it is in there, you ain't ever getting it out.  Sorry Charlie

Hmmm ..as stated above...we have a contract with the seller....not the buyer.... Keep us informed if you find out otherwise...

I agree with Jean (#4 comment). 

Plus, if you want to get technical with the new homeowner, you can tell them information of their home is public information (mortgage records, tax records, blueprints, etc).  I wonder if they will contact Google Maps, Mapquest, zillow, etc to remove their housing information.  Maybe they should also contact all of the previous homeowners to remove any pictures they posted online. Or better yet destroy all photos they have of their previous home.

Yes, I am being facetious.  If you are not providing their personal information, I am not sure what the problem is.

Aaron

The photographer who took the original photos (possibly the agent) owns the copy right to the photos.  You could offer to sell them for a nominal fee to the buyer so that they could chase down the copy right infringements.  But even that is a loosing battle because a country that does not recognize US copy rights could be hosting the content on their servers (ie China). 

Another thing for you to think about is the aerial and street view photos on Bing, Yahoo, and Google maps.  Is the buyer going to have all of these Internet power houses take down those photos as well?  Not likely.

While I respect a buyers request for privacy, the photos were taken at a time that the buyer had no controlling stake in the property and therefore has no rights to the photos or their use. 

Thee is no way one can remove all the information from a past sold listing. . it is impossible. 

It just can't be done!  With syndication, once the train has left the station, there's no getting it back.  The best you can do is remove it from the places you have a direct account, but there's no way your going to get every agent who has it on their site to remove, nor every other site using a feed.  Google an address you have for sale and you'll find sites you've never heard of showing the home for sale.  As said before, you had permission from the seller to market, and you owe no obligation to the buyer.  It's just like the rest of social media, once it's out there, it's out there!

Very timely since I just got a call from a 6 month old listing that someone found hanging out there on the internet.  I can't imagine how you got that done, but way to go.  Way above and beyond there, but what a class move.  We now have to get a special addendum signed by the seller to post the home on the interenet, maybe there should be one for the buyer too, that it will not go away right away.

This must be the next wave. I have not had anyone request that this happen.  I am surprised that you were able to get the listing off of all those sites.  I have a feeling that it is just a matter of time before it is included in the disclosures that buyers sign when they submit their purchase offer.

It would be difficult to remove a listing from ALL websites.  In some cases, websites may scrape listing information from other websites.

Norma...

Let's take this a step further ... if the previous owner has family photos posted on FaceBook in the house, should they be asked to remove them?

I'm not a lawyer, but a photograph is a historical document, and as long as it was taken and published with permission then I believe that it stands as of the day it was shot.

Just my opinion though.

I am not sure anyone would be able to remove it totally from the Internet. Site like Trulia have them out there as sold comps.

Norma - excellent post and its my understanding that once on the net, always on the net. You can go back and unlink sites like you did, great job. I agree with Kathryn above that it's just a matter of time that disclosures will be inclusive with lisitng agreements.

This is only happened to me once, a new buyer wanted all the photos and internet marketing taken down. It was my listing.

I took it down everywhere I could, but once it is in Google it is there until it goes down.

Norma, thank you for bringing this forward for us...it's something i haven't experienced yet but could see it happening in the future...food for thought & it's not a bagel!

With RSS feeds and IDX and ... coming soon RPR .... this is not going to be do-able.

Norma it makes sense to me to remove as much info as you can find once the home has been sold.  I don't think it matters that you work for the seller and not the buyer.  I think it's good for you that you sought to remove as much as possible.  Afterall, that buyer that you didn't represent might someday be a seller that you will represent.

I wrote a similar post the other day about where in the workd did I put that listing.  I just use a few keywords or terms to find them and delete or alter them.  Good post and conscientious effort to removed outdated info.

I had a friend try to sell his home buy owner. He eventually went with a local agent but his property kept showing up in fsbo adds for a year or so after the property had sold. Neither the new buyer or my friend were very pleased.

ouch, I never thought about this...

Interesting thread for sure....seller's provide their consent....most likely we will see buyers needing to do the same...

I can't believe the number of agents who have commented as if this agent went above and beyond their call of duty.  As agents, our job is to bring a ready, willing, and able buyer.  To me, marketing a home is the main avenue for accomplishing this task.  As such, when the home is sold, it should be our job to remove it from the sites where we have previously placed it.  How hard could it be to create a check-list, or merely keep track of the places you have marketed a listing?  This task shouldn't be regarded as a "beyond the call of duty," as much as it should be regarded a responsibility of ours.  Norma, thanks for being responsible and helping keep a higher image of agents across the nation.  

Interesting timing.  My new neighbor was complaining last night of the very same thing.  She bought her house in September and a month ago a person drove up and asked if they could look at the property.  She explained that the property was not for sale, but the "visitor" insisted it was because he saw it on the Internet.

IMO you will not be able to find and remove the pictures from all the places they end up. You had permission to utilize and post the pictures from the owner of record at the time so you are covered.

Norma - I think your responsiveness will be remembered by the buyer.  It demonstrates service and what a great way to conduct your business.  Can you say marketing?

It is a good point that once something is on the internet, it may be impossible to eradicate.  Maybe there's a way to get at the agreements when data is shared.  If two sites have an agreement to share listings, then that agreement should include an agreement to remove it within a short time once notified by the site that shared the data.

On other discussion forums, I have seen buyers comment that people are driving up to, and even entering their house because it is for sale on the internet.  In several cases those buyers were investigating law suits against their agents for falsely advertising the house.  Not a good thing.  Also not a good thing is prospective buyers or sellers deciding not to do business with an agent because they noticed how many of their old listings were still hanging around.  If any of those lawsuits hit, prepare for the future to get a little more complicated.

I have to agree with that buyer, I didn't like it either when we bought our home.  When I do listings I'm conscientious of the photos I take.  I take enough to sell it but will not put up "needless" pictures.  Also, I will remove as much as I can with only leaving the main exterior photo.  It is a large task, especially if that buyer was actually LOOKING for all the pics! yikes! 

Thought provoking post, and great follow up comments. Agree that the agent's responsibility was only to the seller. Of course, you can't continue to advertise a property for sale after it is sold.

We edit, host and syndicate thousands of video tours for hundreds of agents and in any given month we will get a few requests from the new buyer with a list of sites they want the video/listing removed from. If it is sites we directly syndicated to then the process is simple.  Even taking down from other sites is usually as simple as an email to those sites support with a cc to the new buyer.  

However, I do see this becoming a much larger issue so proper track of the sites that an agent personally syndicates to may be prudent.  

 

Mark Passerby, HDhat

 

We have had this problem also. We have got calls from people wanting to look at a property we had sold 6 months ago. We do track where we put our listings and remove them when the property closes. However there are some sites such as foreclosure site that pull them from bank lists.

The problem as I see it is if there is any site with your listing still showing it for sale you are most likely violating your state license law by advertising a property you do not have listed. I think this should be everyones concern. When the states start fining you and taking away your license because you are advertising a property you no longer have listed then the real problems begin.

Since we virally populate our listings it is difficult to know everywhere they are, and some we cannot control. I think we do the best we can like removing the listing from out sites, virtual tours, and slideshow flyers.

Great Topic- I hope this does not catch on with buyers!

Um, I think DUDE needs to relax and come to the realization that unless he is in the witness protection program then it is likely THAT NO ONE GIVES A CRAP! 

No one cares where you live
No one cares what the inside of your house looks like (especially with other people's stuff in it)
No one cares that you chopped down all the landscaping & now the house is unrecognizable
No one cares how much you paid (public record BTW)
No one cares how much closing costs the seller paid for you

SHALL I SAY IT ONE MORE TIME...NO ONE CARES!

That's just one of the cons of the internet.  There is so much information out there that it compromises your privacy.  But you did the right thing and provided great customer service. Hopefully that buyer will remember you in the future.

interesting topic! one that many of us have not thought of... Heck, even Zillow is a place we can often see the MLS pics... and to go back to blogs and remove.. YIKES that could be cumbersome

I taught a class on Video Marketing to The Local boards here and I stress that you never want to use specifics like an address, Price ect.  because video's end up every where.

Do them as a Teaser with you contact info and then they work in your favor, because they end up everywhere.

By the way, I'm very popular in France right now? Who would have guessed!

Maybe this is an issue that will become more prevalent....the internet is reality...and truth be known...has spiraled out of the buyer's control....sites are like that...and you did an admirable job in quelling what you could...

Interest head's up in this post today. Thanks!

Patricia/Seacoast NH

Interest head's up in this post today. Thanks!

Patricia/Seacoast NH

Making me think about how the cycles of consumers are changing... answering machines so that we don't miss a call... caller ID so that we screen the calls... facebook sharing every detail of our life.  I think the next generation will be OK with having all details out there for the taking, but demanding protections for bank incryption, ID theft, opt in policies.  My clients tell me about the history of a home we go see (which is not usually relevant to our purpose of finding them a home they want!)

Well, looks like I have to add something new to my checklist when closing properties.  Wow..  when it works it works well. 

As many have said, it's virtually impossible to do - completely remove that is. Once it's closed in the MLS and other sites that you listed it too, the syndication should remove it from other sites as well. However as pointed out, some sites hold the listing as comps.

Welcome to the 21st century.

As a REALTOR with a background in media production and photography, I have had this asked of buyers as part of the contingency in the purchase contract. Because I do both photo and video for the properties I market the buyers are informed that their wish will be fulfilled on the close of escrow. I also ensure they are made aware in writing that all efforts to remove any videos and photos in our domain will be made. Any images or videos outside of our domain are not under our control and no effort will be made to request a cease and desist.

An agent can go only so far to remove something from the internet. Especially the way things are syndicated now a day. I have had some of my property videos on various Asian websites. And with that in mind, I have to make sure the buyers don't try to hold me liable to misleading them to think all the references would be removed. The buyer can always request the assistance of a lawyer if they feel that much of a security threat to assist with a takedown notice.

I think I would rather be asked by the buyer to  unscramble an egg!!!

Norma, I also had a request from a buyer to remove all photos of his house.  He said he had people sitting in front of the home and knocking on the door.  NOT!  I didn't have that when I marketed for several months, so why would it happen now.  I told him that I did not have control of all the places it would show up, Zillow, Trulia, etc.  On my web site, I marked it SOLD.  It's public information.  You went way beyond what I was willing to do.  I sincerely hope this doesn't become a trend.  In addition to areas where we are not allowed to post "for sale" signs, now if we have to remove all traces from the internet, we will all become "secret agents"!

I don't know the answer here but I do know that when one of my listings is sold I remove it from the sites where I have posted it. It if goes somewhere beyond where I have posted it, not sure what I can do about it. But now that I think about it I have never removed them from AR. I only post that they are sold.

Interesting, I never would have thought someone would care that much!

It is amazing where all of our listings end up when you advertise open house , price reduction or any changes it goes everywhere. Thanks for the reminder. I don't think you could find everything out there on any property.

Responding to Moore & Moore- yes, we can take down info where WE PLACED it, but we can't control sites like Trulia and Zillow, who get their infor from the MLS, and then keep it there forever. Once it's on the MLS in our area, it's sent out on the Internet and out of our control.  We have a little check box on our listing agreement that allows the seller to market their home on the Internet. If he doesn't want to, we have a separate form for that. 

The buyer most probably found the house on the internet, or through the MLS,  maybe now buyers have to be made aware that it can be out there forever.

This is a very timely topic and a problem. I recently received a request from a seller, who I didn't even list, only did a BPO, to remove his house from the internet. He was incensed over the fact that I had loaded it. I didn't, my banner came up the side of the site he found it at and assumed it was me.  His house had been sold nearly a year before and it was still coming up on real estate websites. The other concern is agents who no longer have a listing,and have set up address specific websites, it gets relisted and the agent who no longer has the listing still has the active website running. I have notified agents of this before and got no response.

What a fascinating topic and one I'm sure will generate lots more discussion. I'm guessing the new owner bought a very custom house, easily identifiable by those in the neighborhood. I often take exterior photos of our handyman work and only ask permission for interior shots. I am careful to remove any street numbers from the photos and never disclose owner or street, just a town.

Wonder when I too will get into trouble.

I've often wondered in 5 years or so, when properties are duplicated in internet marketing efforts, what will happen.  Is there some sort of ethics involved if an agent registers a street address for her listing as a domain and then decides to hang onto it?  Will former listing agents use that as leverage to get a listing, "well, mr. seller, i have the registered domain address for your house, a flickr account with previous pictures attached to your address..." etc.  The agent from 2010 has the domain and even if she enters it "sold" has been building up all the SEO so when the next listing agents comes around when the property is re-sold, doesn't stand a chance for showing up as #1 in the search engines under that property address.

Tina in Virginia

My two cents: the online photos of a home that sold are that of the seller's home, not the buyer's home. The photos most certainly show the seller's furniture, the seller's landscaping, the seller's paint job and everything else that belonged to the seller. What the buyer purchased was a couple of walls, windows, doors and a driveway. I would most certainly remove the home from the internet as much as possible at the seller's request or not even put it there to begin with if the seller insists (happens!) but considering that anyone can see anyone else's home on Google and Google Earch at any given time..............come on!

We have this request all the time and we let the homeowner know that we are only able to remove all the advertising that we were responsible for and/or posted to the internet.  And unfortunately cannot clean-up the internet spiders that have a hold of their house.  Probably should be in a buyer disclosure!

I guess I can understand WHY they might like more privacy, and I think it's great to honor the request on personal sites and advertising, but I too have my clients sign a form which notifies them that their home could me on the Internet or other Marketing.

Talk about an impossible taks. I still get calls on listings which have closed 2-3 years ago since they are still lurking on some website they had migrated to. It's tough to scrub the internet clean.

I always include a "write-in" on the Listing Agreements that denotes "Internet Marketing on Multiple Venues". Maybe I should be more specific regarding the potential permanent possibilities of internet exposure.

Wow..never thought about that!!

Partially absurd....  The only reason I would do anything above and beyond telling them to go pound sand, would be in the hopes of future business from them or someone they know.  But frankly, I'm not a big fan of clients who make unreasonable requests anyway.

On a side note, to be cautious about what pictures you might take out of respect for future owners, I would argue, is going against your feduciary responsibility to your seller, in doing everything possible to market and sell their home.

At the time the pictures were taken, you were given specific written consent to be able to post those pictures (assuming you have a standard listing contract).  There is nothing in the pictures, which at the time, belonged to the new owners.  Go pound sand.

The counter arguement would be that the permission to post those pictures was only for the purpose of marketing and selling the property.  That task is completed, permission no longer granted.   

Even further, I doubt that a picture of the outside (something that can be seen by anyone who drives by) would allow the counterarguement any weight, pictures of the inside

But if asked to take all the pictures off the internet, I'd tell them to go talk to the internet about that...

So has anyone looked at maps.google.com and clicked on your home address? In many area, use the "street scene" and you can see the whole neighborhood, your house front, back, behind and not to mention the satelitte views just like driving around in your car. Pretty soon the infra-red cameras will start from somewhere up there and you'll have no privacy at all. Most of the gated communities in my neck of the woods, escaped the google VW with the camera on top because they couldn't get passed the guard gate. However, I also find this a useful tool in selling real estate to out of town lookers who want to know what the neighborhood looks like without much effort. Saves me gas money! The internet is here to stay and growing at exponential rates with information overload.

I don't think we have any obligation to the buyer whatsoever in this regard, but of course we don't want anyone unhappy after a sale.  I think Roy Kelley is right: this is a new disclosure for home buyers.

Great piece!  This is one of those topics that we know is there but is in the shadows of our thoughts.  Thanks for shining the light on it!

WOW - This never crossed my mind!  I tend to agree that since you were working for the seller you had no obligation to the buyer so you really did go above and beyond the call of duty.

It is an interesting question that raises more issues than it solves. Some of the issues are good for realtors. I'll blog about those on my blog.

The next MILLIONARE in the making,

Someone needs to invent the self destructing BLOG, have it expire in a year? I am sure the software is out there - somewhere? It just needs to become common place and easy to use.

By the way - it happened to me also, I just typed in the adress of the home (thats how the owner found it) and deleted them.

Thanks for the blog

In my non-legal opinion, you did not post "their" house on the internet. You posted the sellers house with their permission. You are not giving out their name and phone number.

If having their homes picture on the internet is a violation then Google, Yahoo, Bing .. maps and Zillow and other sites would have to remove their house too. I sure do not see gaps in street view or Zillow.

 

Great topic for discussion...it's got our team talking about how to handle something like this.  Thanks for the post!

Wow. I am sure this is something that will be discussed in our next meeting. We may need to have something the clients sign. Thanks for bringing this to light.

Diane Casale

Great post, a hot bed topic for sure.  Its hard to take off anything once its on the internet.  But, you did what you could control.  Good for you. 

It seems that every time I turn around, there's a new addendum needed. It's issues like this that make that happen.

This is a great topic. However, I feel that it should be the responsibility of the websites that are displaying the information to be sure that they update it. If they pull info from a local MLS, they really need to do updates to provide accurate information. I think that local MLS's should have requirements in place that address this with companies that are given access to the info. Even though I feel it's the websites responsibility to update their info, it will likely be put on our heads as Realtors to have to address the potential problem.

Good Subject!  For those of us in California we are covered in this respect. We have lots of CAR Forms... The Statewide Buyer and Sellers Advisory Form Page 8 Line 36, The California Res. Purchase Agreement page 6 line 19, For the Seller Line 6 of the Res. Listing Agreement, and if you want to take it a step further for disclosure there is always the BMI "Buyer Material Issues" you could always ad it to your Agent Visual Inspection report Too under other. With all of that unless you sign a confidential agreement with all the parties  can't see how it wasn't disclosed.

If you understand syndication this is far difficult than the posters #58 Moore and Moore and #66 Darryl seem to comprehend. Sorry to get snarky, but "make a checklist"??? I'm going to post a blog on this now.

 

The administration should form a Internet Real Estate Photo Privacy commission to study the problem thoroughly and develop a solution that will support and protect all those that may be impacted by this phenomena.  It should be a thorough study and should look at the impact that any future legislation would have on the real estate industry so as not to negatively impact the economy. 

Then we should have hearings and testimony before the IREPP commission involving experts in the fields of real estate, mortgage lending, internet privacy, and home owners impacted both positively and negatively by this practice.

Then a bill will be proposed in the House of Representatives and, when passed, will be sent to the Senate for consideration.  They will vote on the House bill and when they cannot pass the House bill on first reading both the House and Senate will confer in another congressional committee to rewrite the bill and come to a mutual agreement. 

The bill is now 1872 pages long and is sent back to House of Representatives for quick passage before Easter break.  This means that nobody has time to read the bill but it is passed anyway and sent to the Senate.  They pass it blindly and send it to the U.S. President for approval.  

The President signs the bill into law and another agency is formed.

Let's not open that can of worms.

 

Norma,

This exact thing happened to me about 1 year ago. A buyer  saw the home they had purchased on the internet..on Zillow. (Happened to find me on Active Rain to track me down) When I tried to go in and remove the listing, I could not and had to call the "heads" at Zillow . After much aggravation, someone there did remove the pictures and listing.  Never thought of using a disclosure that others have mentioned using..A good idea.

Oops.  this one we can't blame on part-time agents can we?  Rather we have software for evrything else...why not one that tracks every link and portal your listing information is shared with, so that we the listing is sold within two weeks with the push of a button all links come down.  Or all posting are for only the average length of days on the market and if not sold it would have to be re-posted.

 

Bob Burns

Very interesting topic. IMHO we can only control the websites WE post listing too. Furthermore, when the house was listed, we/i were representing the Seller/Owner at the time. We are not representing the current owner. While I am sensitive to the concerns of the new owner, they are still not our client.

Good question.  I think if we note in the sites we have control of that it is sold we have done our duty.  We have little control over the other sites.  That is like asking you to go through old newspapers and rip out ads.  I do think syndicators should be more responsible and keep things up to date.

I would not have entertained the request. Photo's are the property of the photographer. Celebrities unknowingly have their photos used everyday in news and gossip websites and they are not able to order the photo's removed. Is this homeowner going to contact google and ask them to remove the street view photo of their property. If so goodluck.

Great Topic Norma - and as long as I have been an enabler of the technology that allows agents to syndicate listing it's never been a topic that has come up in my experience working with real estate agents or sitting on the other side enabling the technology for them to post/syndicate listings.

Two observations - nearly everybody who has posted on one side or the other here is right.  Certainly, if a buyer makes a request of the agent to remove stuff from personal sites, that's a reasonable request that can be accomodated.  But to the point other agents have made here,  how can you unfire a gun?

You can't.  You obviously went way above what is normally called for and tried to get as much as you could off local sites, and maybe that's all you can do.  Someone else made the legitimate point that all that information is already syndicated throughout a ton of other databases like Zillow, Trulia, County Records, Reallist, etc.   The Appraisal Information from the property is being sucked up and repurposed by A La Mode and other companies to power property/CMA databases,  and the Seller gave permission, and the listing is a house after all that can be driven to and viewed in 99% of cases...so I just don't see how this request is reasonable/fulfillable anyway.

Great topic though, and certainly something to think about, and way to go in serving your client.

Great post.  This is something I've always wondered when the ball would drop and someone would ask me to remove the marketing of their home.  Unfortunately, we don't always know where it ends up - I agree it would be like trying to rip the ads out of the newspaper!

I hadn't thought about this either. It makes me really think about my blog posts and the fact that they too will potentially be "out there" forever.

I hope I never get that call. Let's hope these new homeowners are aware of how much they were asking of you.

In Minnesota, we already have a new form called the internet display options form and we have four options to go over with our sellers. I usually suggest that they agree to have it n the internet and display photos, but not to allow comments or auto evaluations of value.

Had a call like this about 6 months ago, but from someone who was not related to any of my transactions. I was referred to her by a former client. In a nutshell, she told me people were coming to her house asking her how much she wanted for her house... I could not understand at first since she was not listed in the MLS, but then she told me that she had purchased her house over a year ago and it still showed up on many web sites as 'for sale'. She asked me to do something about it because I was a 'real estate agent' and it was my job. I think she meant it in the general sense as it affects all of us. And I could understand her frustation.

So it looks like its becoming our 'general' responsibility when it comes to leaving traces of advertising around when we heavily marketed a property and then sell it, and some of it lingers on the internet for a long time, especially on the obscure web sites that do screen scraping (stealing of information). Here's a new marketing phrase: "Post-sale advertising collateral damage". Perhaps that should be a blog by itself.

So to save face to all Realtors nationwide as she made it 'my job', I asked her to help me identify all the websites on which her property appeared, most of which I had never heard of before. I took the time to go to each website, found the webmaster or customer service email address, and in the powers vested in me as a Realtor, asked them to remove from their listings this particular property.

She seemed please with that and that I had some form of "apparent' authority.

I know that I took some time to save face our business, but in the end I felt good that I made a general contribution to our business like community service and 'saved' this consumer from our 'Post-sale advertising collateral damage'.

Interesting thread!  I don't believe we have any obligation to remove the information once the house is sold.  If we use electronic media, we should be able to update the ads to show that the property was sold ( a good idea and a good self-promotional marketing idea), but to track down the listing on the hundreds of websites its on?  I don't think so. 

Perhaps something like the follow would be of help in the purchase agreement.

"Purchaser acknowledges that the Seller has authorized publication of information and photographs promoting the sale of this property in a number of media including the Internet. Seller's agent will endeavor to remove this information and photographs from those Internet sites under their control which may not remove all instances of this information and photograph from the Internet."

Okay, my first response was just a little bit sarcastic. 

As a matter of fact, the listing agreement we use gives permission to use photos, newspapers, internet, and signs to market properties. 

Maybe there should be a disclaimer or notification in the purchase agreement that acknowledge photos may exist in the public domain?  I don't really think so. 

What will you do about the Google street view or the satellite view of your swimming pool full of guests on a hot July weekend?  Who is responsible for removing those photos? 

Just my opinion.

 

There is a website that claims to remove a persons name from the internet, it is called something similar to reputation scrubber or the like. Wonder if it would work for homes.

I don't think it is our responsibility to remove these pictures. There are pictures of the house on the local property appraiser's website. Its public information. I'd tell the guy to get over it.

As several others have mentioned, Google and other search engines have a ton of information about properties along with personal information. While in GA we provide an option to the seller to not have advertising on the Internet, no owner elects that. We are obligated to remove listings at the expiration or termination of the contract, but only those under our control.

We have had this problem also-it is much more time consuming to remove than put on! This is a real problem!!

Very interesting topic. Norma!  If asked, I'd be sure to mark the property SOLD and perhaps remove interior photos - and be sure to let them know that I don't control other sites nor can I control the archive sites. They can certainly try and contact the owners of other sites if they choose.

 

Great topic for discussion. Just sitting back thinking of what your up against.

Best of luck

never thought about this ever.  Gots my mind working so early this morning. hahaha

Cool! Another fun thing for us to worry about.  You hear all the time that once something is online, it is there forever!  Some people are going to have to realize that we probably have no way of actually removing all traces of a sold home online.  Someone above commented on Google maps and the street view feature...I had to comment that when that first came out my twisted little mind had this thought...

 

What if you had your boyfriend over that day and your husband saw the pic of his truck in the driveway???  I know, I know...very sick and twisted and maybe I watch too much 24!!!! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!

You tried but you probably were not completely successful- the owners at the time gave you permission to post and they were your clients, I assume not the buyers unless it was dual. However your efforts may get you that same listing to sell again in a few years.

As a home stager, I also place photos and slideshows on the internet.  I can't imagine trying to "get it all back."  I will definitely be even more careful about getting written permission, and will add to my permission slip that the photos may forever be on the internet.

I have a list of all the sites I put my ads on and go down it one-by-one to remove them. At that point they also disappear from the other sites that feed off the primary site. However, I still have one listing that we withdrew mutually several months ago. Guess what, it is still showing up on Zillow. No way I can get it off.

Luckily, I have had no buyers complain to this point. But leaving homes on the web after they have been taken off the markert via sale, expiration, withdrawl, etc is not good. We need to stay on top of that and so do the sites that place them without our permission.

Great topic Norma.  I wonder if it would be prudent to disclose up front what we are willing to do once the listing is sold/expired/terminated.  I agree with some members that it seems pretty unrealistic to remove all evidence of the listing from the internet as so much of it may be out of our control.  I think disclosing up front may make some sellers fearful of internet marketing, but they should be aware of it.

 

Very interesting to see how far and wide the marketing took your listing.  While I agree with the statements of some others that you had permission from the seller to take & post the pictures and the pictures belong to you, it seems to me that it might have been a good business decision to remove them, even though it was a time-consuming task.  Definitely a gesture of good will.  I suppose if too many of those requests come in, you might have to rethink the policy.

I'm with Andrea and Darin...."come on!"  We need make sure that we stop marketing the house as an active listing, but much of this is beuaond our control, I am certainly not going to go the the lengths that you went to, I am not about to try to track down other agents and 3rd party companies, that's just not reasonable to expect.  Like John Stossel would say..."Give me a break!"   (Great post)

I've heard it before too.  When we sold a home with HGTV a few years ago, we asked the buyer to sign a release because the home was sold before the show aired.  It is hard to anticipate what might happen because the information is out there.

What an interesting topic!!  Norma, I commend you for putting in all the effort necessary to even make a dent in removing a past sold listing from the internet.  Unfortunately, as many have pointed out here, it's still out there.. You could never get every trace removed and even if you removed it from all of the currently active websites, there are records and cached pages saved all over the internet as well.  Basically, once there, it will always be there.

As far as responsibility, I would say what you did was a favor in the purest sense.  I don't see how you had any more responsibility to remove all that data than anyone else.  Your agreement was with your seller at the time and I think most people would agree that this buyer is just a little over sensitive... Where do you draw the line?  What about photos from the buyer and seller before this one?  What about the builder who likely advertised it as well?  Are the plans secret too? 

If asked, I would also make every effort to help someone out but I would make it perfectly clear that the task is impossible to complete with any degree of certainty and that I would be helping out purely out of good will, not out of any sense of responsibility.   Last, I would hope they have a compelling reason.  Otherwise, it's a bit over the top, maybe even nutty. 

I've had that a few times. I upload all of my clients' videos to 12 sites. Within a month or two they're now on 20 sites! I can't remove them as I didn't put them on in the first place! Honestly it takes more time to remove them then it did to upload them in the first place! I just leave them up as realtors get lots of new buyer inquiries from old videos, so that's an added plus.

Since the Internet is so unregulated along with the fact that you had prior permission to post the photos by you seller, this person probably has no legal standing to demand this.  However, this is one of those things that, when someone requests, you need to at least make a valiant attempt to try to please them. This person could be a future client or could know other people in the community that may need your business.  You don't want bad Karma out there if you can possibly avoid it.

I wonder how the "tell them to pound sand" guy does in the public relations and repeat business department.

 

I've had that a few times. I upload all of my clients' videos to 12 sites. Within a month or two they're now on 20 sites! I can't remove them as I didn't put them on in the first place! Honestly it takes more time to remove them then it did to upload them in the first place! I just leave them up as realtors get lots of new buyer inquiries from old videos, so that's an added plus

I've had that a few times. I upload all of my clients' videos to 12 sites. Within a month or two they're now on 20 sites! I can't remove them as I didn't put them on in the first place! Honestly it takes more time to remove them then it did to upload them in the first place! I just leave them up as realtors get lots of new buyer inquiries from old videos, so that's an added plus

I've had that a few times. I upload all of my clients' videos to 12 sites. Within a month or two they're now on 20 sites! I can't remove them as I didn't put them on in the first place! Honestly it takes more time to remove them then it did to upload them in the first place! I just leave them up as realtors get lots of new buyer inquiries from old videos, so that's an added plus

Interesting post, Norma. I have a 25 cent suggestion, why don't we as agents work with our local MLS to have a category "NOT FOR SALE", that way we can change it from active to pending to sold to not for sale and all the IDX, etc. sites will get the new status correct. Maybe this is just to simple.

This happened to me once a few years ago.  The new owner seemed mad at me that the photos were still up.  I assured her that since it was sold, it would only remain in the MLS and that only agents would have access to it.  I actually could not remove the pics once the listing was closed.  She seemed unsatisfied, but there was nothing I could do!

Davd in Boston

I bought a classic car once, and later I saw a picture of it on another website from when it was for sale. I bought a stove on the internet, and later came across a copy of the old ad.

Bottom line - I did not have any ownership rights at the time the picture was taken. This to me is no different than the homeowner who wants data removed; it was not their house when the pictures were taken or when the listing was entered. There are no pictures of their personal property in the photo's, and certainly no pictures of their children.

Seems like much ado about nothing to me. I would respectfully suggest that the person who buys a home and then spends time worrying about old listings might need a hobby.

I could see where this would be a problem.  I really don't think that we have any obligation to the buyer to remove every piece of internet marketing from a listing we once carried.  However, I do think that we try to comply as best we can.  As someone stated earlier, this would become a major undertaking if you carry lots of listings.  Excellent post on something that will probably become a problem in the foreseeable future. 

Norma - You did above and beyond your duty in our opinion. Just to show you the power of the internet. It can be mind boggling. Maybe when they decide to sell they'll remember you for your efforts as well and the depth of your marketing.

Keep in mind that paragraph 36 of the CAR Statewide Buyers and Sellers Disclosure clearly informs the Buyer, of this...

Norma, you are way too nice, and these buyers need to get a life!  As long as the listing is marked as sold, I don't see that they have any claim here.  If it's still being listed as active or pending, then that of course is a problem that the offending websites are responsible for fixing - and the buyer can contact them - not you.  You sold the house for your client - the seller - and you should be able to continue marketing the sale of that property for as long as you want - that's what we do!  I guess you could remove the addres, as a courtesy - but this stuff is all public record anyway - and the internet makes it that much easier for people to access it. These buyers need to wake up and realize we're now in the 21st century!!

You really have two issues.

1. How far should you go to make a previous client happy when they make an unreasonable or impossible request?

2. Since the information posted is public record (other than a picture taken before the buyer took posession) does the new owner have any right to request the removal of information?

 

 

I've enjoyed the comments and a second cup of tea while reading them this morning!

I must admit my first response was, "You want me to do WHAT?"  I realized it was an impossible task and I'm sure, even being the clean freak I am, there are links still lurking throughout cyberspace.  Where are those black holes when we need them?

By the way, the buyers were lovely and I was more than happy to comply with their request---up to a point...

Jeff #150 - another good reason to always have buyer and seller sign the SBSA!  Now if we could just get them to read it ...

Norma - you certainly did bend over backward to help the buyer out. I know that I would have removed any pictures that I posted from the MLS and any other websites, but not sure that I would have gone too much beyond that.

This too happens when a listing goes from one agent to another.  It's hard to remove yourself from the internet.  Once you post something it is typically there FOREVER!!!

Norma, yeah.  It's a whole lot easier to get a home posted on the best sites on the web than it is to get it off! 

Norma....This post has definited got alot of attention.  I tend to agree with those who have previously voiced the opinion that all the marketing efforts were done for the seller's benefit in an attempt to do the best job selling their home.  Removing the pictures and information from obvious places like MLS and your individual websites is reasonable but trying to scrub all evidence of the marketing efforts is not only time consuming, it is impossible.  Your work was done for the seller who authorized or agreed to your methods.  Maybe the buyer needs to acknowledge the fact that there maybe photos of his "new" home that could remain on the internet forever!

Featured In Cosmic Cowpie

This would be the same as the seller asking us to collect every paper publication that  has been printed with their new home in it. It is silly. If you want a home without any kind of past, buy a new home or quit being a freak! It is probably the pictures we took of the home that got them interested in it in the first place. It is like the guy with the pretty girlfriend who gets mad at people looking at her. Get an ugly girlfriend if you don't want people looking!

Norma,  I was at a Social Media seminar yesterday.  We learned that once something is on the Internet, it is there forever.  Go to InternetWayBack.com.  You can find about anything there. 

My guess is that it will probably be one more stipulation added to the sales contract eventually, just as a CYA measure.

LOL @ Jenna #69

True, people don't really care. But it can be unsettling. 

There are other issues too, because with syndication especially we have people calling asking about listings which are now under contract or sold, and new listing agents could accuse us of advertising our old listings without their authorization, often at (eek) a higher price. 

Brave new world, isn't it? 

Wow, it's amazing what we have come to! Great job on your marketing efforts! I have to wonder why the new owner cares so much, I understand that they may be private people, but it's not like there is a hidden camera sitting in his home...Some people take things too far.

Norma, Great topic. 

I have argued for a long time that our syndicated listings leave us the agent with NO CONTROL in may aspects when it comes to the Internet.  I once thought having my listing everywhere was what it took to sell them, but I soon realized I lost control of them as well.  I am now very cautious of where I put my listings, but I feel we have a real battle ahead with our own MLS feeds supplying other feeds such as Trulia, Hot Spot, Home Zone, Frontdoor.com and many others. 

I recently went through the same thing. The buyer was calling and leaving very rude messages on a daily basis to both myself and the Broker. I did my very best but nothing seemed fast enough for him and he threatened to sue for damages if I didn't get it done! I did my best but I'm sure it's still out there somewhere!

Some people are just RUDE!

Wow great topic, its interesting to read the many views on this situation.  I haven't yet been in a situation where a buyer asked me to do this.  The way I percieve it is that we are not obligated or responsible to remove the photos of the home at the request of the buyer.  That's not to say that if a buyer called me and was polite about the situation that I wouldn't do my best to remove the photos from the places that I control but I am almost certain we're not required to remove them nor can we be subjected to any penalty for not removing them, it would be more of a favor to the buyer who is asking.

I'm not a laywer, so I'm not positive of the exact legal answer but  based on my real estate and photography background (i have a virtual tour biz on the side)I am pretty confident that:

• Once a buyer buys a home, he is not buying the rights to every photo that was previously taken at the residence.  If the photos were taken with permission of the homewoner at the time, they are not even the seller's property, the person who took the photos has the ownership of them unless they pass on the rights to someone else.  If photos were taken by a virtual tour company, depending on how they structure their agreement with agents, more than likely you will full rights to the images you purchase from them or at least limited rights that allow you to distribute/post.  In the case that virtual company still holds some sort of rights to photos, that company would be the only person that would have the right to ask you to take them down, and as a paying customer I doubt they would ask you to do that at any time,even after the property is sold.
• The only problem I could see is if an agent continued to actively "publish" the home for sale on a domain/space that they control after the home was sold. This has nothing to do with the photos though, its more an issue of misleading the public with misinformation.  If you are showcasing your success of a listing that you sold you are within your rights to use the photos for that purpose, because you have rights to the photo.  If its an old blog, I woul dhappen to guess it's the same as an old newspaper, I don't think we can be held accountable for an old newspaper or homes and land magazine still being around after a home has sold that is still displaying the home as active.
  

If the person is nice to me about it and really that concerned, I would more than likely do them the favor of removing them from the spots that I controlled.  I would probably try to turn it into additional business by saying something like:

AGENT: "I'm sorry for the inconvience..I understand where you are coming from however I would like you to know that I own the rights to the those photos of the home you purchased, I make sure of this with my listings because I use the photos to help demonstrate my successes once I complete my transactions and publish it only as "sold" once the property is closed."

BUYER: "I understand but its just that (insert their reason they want the photos off here)"

AGENT: "Being that you were so nice, if you are still concerned I'd be willing to my best to remove it from the places control. I cannot gaurantee that it will be removed from everywhere on the internet, that is next to impossible. This should reduce the amount of people driving by. 

BUYER:  "Thanks so much I appreciate you going out of the way for me"

AGENT: "No, problem.  By the way if you know anyone that needs anything or if any buyers happen to stop by, would you mind giving them my info.  I'm sure they don't want to waste there time driving by homes that arent for sale just as much as you dont like buyers randomly showing up.  I'll point them to up to date resources to save everyone some time and less aggravation."

BUYER:  "Sure. No prob, Thanks again."

Anyways, thats prob how I'd handle it, hoping that I don't get many of these buyers calling though.

Very through provoking, this could get out of hand very quickly.

As others have commented "do we need to remove all advertizing" even that little classified ad that ran for two weeks, I thing not.  As for out dated listing information on some syndicated site that is the sites issue right?

Great post I'm passing it along...

Leslie, I do understand syndication. Apparently what you don't understand is if your listing shows up on Craigslist a year after you sold it, as a current listing, like we have had happen, you are violating license law for advertising a listing you do not have for sale. We had removed it from Postlets and Craigslist and had paperwork to show that we had. However a foreclosure web site didn't remove it from their database and put it back up. I think this is where the future problems will be.

What a great question Norma.  I know we can remove our own advertising, but if it's been syndicated to other sites, tweeted, etc., I don't know that it is possible to completely remove it all.  Maybe there's a great new Internet tool in the making????

When I started in RE, I was told that it was my resposibility to keep my marketing up to date. Well that was in the days before "going viral" and every internet company in the world wanting my listings so that they can sell leads back to me.

Maybe in the end we could ALL use this as an opportunity to take control back from every profiteer internet site out there. I have never been and will never be convinced that anyone looking for real estate in the US can't go to REALTOR.com or a brokerage or real estate company website to find all of the properties available. WE REALLY don't need THEM.

Otherwise, as has become perfectly clear on this thread: WE HAVE LOST CONTROL!!!!

So what does the DOJ think about that?

Everyone should pay particular attention to this issue. It is an ETHICS VIOLATION to advertise a property without the consent of the owner. It is no small joke, that when the property closed, the listing and thus the approval of the PRIOR owner terminated. In the state of Nevada, people have been fined $10,000 (PER AD) for not removing advertising post a sale.

 

Pay attention to where you post your ads and where they are sent after that. I have started to pull ads 30 days before closing (yeah we want to advertise in case of fall out and to get sign calls) just to make sure that they are pulled before the closing date.

As a builder/broker, I have a clause in all my construction contracts that allows me to continue to use photos of the home with a general location, but no street address.  I use them for portfolio purposes. 

 

Good point on the listing exposure to the subsequent owner.  I am a very private person and would not want that info all over the place.  However, it is a very tough thing to put the genie back in the bottle when it comes to the internet.

Wow, great thread everyone. I think I'm going to do the same as response #23 (sorry Amy, I hate to refer to you as a number).

One important aspect of what we are talking about is how to stop the spread of information of negative or unwanted information posted on the internet if we were to get into a nasty situation and someone wanted to post untrue things about us. Has anyone posted any info about online reputation management?

The multiple listing service has to control that because a lot of 3rd party companies syndicate our listings from the MLS. I believe that when you enter a listing, there is a question in the form asking us if we want to advertise the listing online. Maybe if you check "no" it won't get syndicated. But who wants to keep that info secret? We want to sell the property and if the seller allows us to advertise, we should be ablet to do so.

Charita King

 

I think there is a difference between public data about a property and a sold property still being advertised for sale. It is false advertising. While I beleive it is important to expose a property, I don't beleive all websites are equal. I prefer quality over quantity and I monitor my marketing.  Any sites that we syndicate our listings to should be removed within 48 hours of changing the status to sold. On my broker website listings automatically are moved to a section called recently sold and the sale price is removed and it stamped in big red letters sold.

It is a violaion of my real estate board for agents to advertise another broker's exclusive listings other than VOWS/IDX but those dissapear once the status is changed in the system.

in regards to the concerns about old blogs showing the home active, maybe a disclaimer would be a good solution:

 

adding a disclaimer to bottom blog entries showcasing listings, something along the lines of stating that at the time the blog was posted the home was currently active and available for sale.  might have to elaborate a little firther with details, but just throwing it out there to see what everyone things

 

Very interesting topic!

As this issue relates to listing syndication, a lot of sites resyndicate the listings out to other 3rd and 4th party sites, making it hard to control this, so at ListHub we have a policy: Sites that receive listings from our system are not allowed to re-syndicate them.  It helps a lot. 

If you want to reduce the chances of this happening (or make clean-up easier if necessary) you can also reduce the number of feeds going out.  Sometimes agents don't realize that their listings are being syndicated by their

a) MLS

b) brokerage or franchise

c) Web site vendor

d) Print media companies

e) Virtual tour companies

AND MORE.

If you choose one trusted solution for syndication and turn off the syndication options in your other programs things won't seem as overwhelming.

 

 

Great question and a topic that ALL Realtors need to address ASAP.

Make sure that when a listing agreement is signed, you also have a "Marketing" document that explains the web marketing /social media program. (You should have this drafted by your Broker's attorney)

This disclaimer will protect you from the liability of this content (and you want to keep it out there for SEO anyway) and on the Social Media side, you need to create some rules on what the client can not talk about via the social networks (This protects them too!) You do not want a client talking about the house, the negotiations, hardships, ect, and it is out duty to teach the client about these issues.

Thank you so much and have a wonderful day!

LOVE IT!

Harrison

Yes, some sites that don't get their feeds straight off the MLS don't realize when a status has changed. I usually go in and remove the address and either say pending or sold in the remarks.

this has been a problem since the first time anyone ever syndicated a listing.  websites like zillow and such need 'content'.  it is the clicks they accumulate that give them their legitimacy and permit ad revenue.  their accuracy is secondary to clicks and usage metrics.

i've said this many times, the internet will never be as accurate, as complete or as well cared for as our MLS's.  where we subscribers are bound to rules for complete and accurate reporting to ensure that  the data is useful and timely...the 'internet' has no such requirements.   this topic circles back to the issue of grossly underpriced listings that we've been discussing this week...and the way they get around to cause all sorts of trouble.  they are the MLS equivalent of trash info found in all corners of the internet.

just yesterday i got a call from a local agent who got a call from one of his clients...they had a seen a home on zillow which was on my website, but not in my MLS.  so after congratulating ourselves that his client was a LOYAL buyer we joked about how that property could have gotten to zillow.  after thinking about it for some time i realized that it came through my Point2 website. 

so  the takeaways from this one are: 

1.  the internet is a big place.
2.  it does work.
3.  my local agent friend has a loyal buyer client (bless then for that)
4.  the internet does it's thing without regard to our wishes, that's not necessarily bad, but we should keep it in mind.

i need to work up a release that advises sellers and buyers that i have incomplete control over how my listings                     get  shlepped after i lob them up to the Web,  and that any efforts, if any, will be on a best efforts basis.

 

This is certainly good food for thought.   I don't know if you'd ever really be able to track all the info down.

We all work so hard to make sure the properties we are marketing are everywhere.  It is hard to get them removed from everywhere when the time comes.  I have never had that phone call yet, but I do try to remove them from my major marketing places once they are sold.  Great ideas though, and I am sure as the privacy issue gets larger so will this request.

thank you jeff, #150.

Good point.  We spend so much time marketing the listing, we forget to unmarket it.  I suggest you do the best job possible.  That is all that can be realistically expected. 

Great conversation here, Norma.  My view is that the photos were taken and publicized while you were under the employ of the seller.  No obligation to remove them, or any other info posted on the Internet with regard to that listing.

I do like the idea of a disclosure to buyers, though, to ward off this type of request. 

Kudos to you for being kind enough to try to heed the buyer's request, though.  Outstanding effort.

Viral is too good a word. I think that if the listing videos went where you didn't intend it should have been a wake up call that you should have kept a shorter leash on your maketing. Porno sites in Russia? That's never a good thing. I've found my stuff all over the place & have started putting procedures in place so that doesn't happen.  I also don't think that a listing should go on forever personally. Once it's sold, what benefit in the MLS with video?  Pictures leave but the vids?  I always take mine down.

On YouTube alone there are additional checks where you can stop others from downloading & hijacking the video if you want.

We live in a very different world than from days of old. My advice is to roll with the punches.

We live in a very different world than from days of old. My advice is to roll with the punches.

I have also had this request from a buyer to remove his new home from my website etc. He's concern was having people he knows aware of details and information that he didn't want them to know etc. Like you, my website was the easy part but I left it up to him to deal with other realtors who had "lifted" the information from me. There are so many places where this information ends up.

Wow, good question Norma.  You're right, it would be almost impossible to get it completely off the entire web, especially with the IDX and other information.  I had a similar situation, which I was helping an Agent with their Marketing of a property.  The Agent forgot to "inactivate" the property website, nor inform me the property was sold; meanwhile, I kept marketing it (including posting it on Craigslist).  Then I received an angry e-mail from the new owner about how his home is not for sale and to remove my marketing of it.  I certainly understand their feelings about still seeing their new home marketed for sale.  But you really raised a great question about HOW FAR DO YOU AS THE LISTING AGENT TO REMOVE THE MARKETING MATERIAL, especially to sites that you don't control.

Wow, this created quite a string. The more I read, the more I liked answer #2. Disclose to the buyer that it was marketed on the internet and that former listing information and photos will remain on the internet but will not show as an active for sale listing.

I've actually been through this before and hopefully I'll never have another buyer request for removal in the future.  It was an absolute mess locating every site the photos or virtual tours were uploaded to only because other sites took the IDX link from sites I had feed it to.  Norma... you are absolutely correct... taking down everything can be time consuming.

I actually spoke to an attorney after several threatening phone calls from the buyer when a few sites were missed.  What I gathered from the conversation, is the buyer had no legal stand... he couldn't request removal because the photos where property of the agent and authorized by the original owner.  As long as I wasn't marketing the new buyers property for sale... I was not liable.  I now have a list a website that I feed photos and virtural tours to that every seller signs off on.  It also protects me for any future craziness.

I understand the desire for privacy, but my response that I never shared until now... perhaps you should have built a home and not purchased a home previously marketed by an agent... that way you could have guaranteed photos would have never been spread across the internet. 

Needless to say, I'll reconsider a new buyers request to remove photos if such a request is ever made in the future. 

Great topic & discussion. I thought about it when the local news did a report several months ago about how pictures and personal info posted on Facebook may keep you from being hired as companies are now screening Facebook as part of their hiring process. It is indeed interesting & curious to see how the legal community will take up this issue. As said above the Internet is one of the most powerful, changing media in today's world and laws have not be able to keep up with it's evolution.

I think you did the right thing. I agree that it's not your responsibility to track down every website that has the property on it, but I think it's only fair to remove it from the sites you control. I would tell the homeowner that's what you'll do, but if he finds it anywhere else to email you the sites and that you'll do your best to help them get removed.

Some people are just really private, and maybe this particular owner has a valid reason for his request. I recently short-sold my home and asked the listing agent (I used a professional foreclosure company to negotiate on my behalf) to remove all of the photos from the listing once the house went into contract. It's all too easy to get public information about people online and the last thing I wanted was my personal belongings out there for anyone to see.

I understand where everyone else is coming from, but I think you're all forgetting one important thing - we're in the customer service business. This homeowner may very likely become a future seller, he's already seen how well you can market the property. This is your chance to let your service skills shine. He's a lot more likely to remember you in a positive light than if you were to tell him to take a hike.

Just something else we as realtors are responsible for.  Once something is on the internet it is there forever. it is impossible to remove a listing totally. 

It is probably pretty rare that a buyer would play Sherlock Holmes on his new home -- but I do understand the request.  I suppose we should be keeping a list of where listings are posted; seems like a waste of time though.  I find new posting sites weekly and simply upload a brochure or tour and rarely go back to the newly found site unless contacted. 

Anne in Austin

Wouldn't you just be responsible for what you put on the internet? It was nice to go above and beyond contacting other websites, but in reality you wouldn't know all the different websites that took your content and added it to their site... like they say, what goes on the internet stays on the internet.

The new owner's info on when they purchased, full name, address, and what they purchased it for is public record too, I wish it wasn't! I'd care more about that than old listings...

Shelly Whitworth
www.MorSystems.com

 

I have had this issue also, and I removed the home from the sites I posted the home on, but once it's on the internet it is there forever.  This is a very good topic and I agree we will probably need to disclose this to buyers and sellers.

I don't understand how a buyer can request that photos of the sellers home be taken down or what they are so paranoid about.

But what is more confusing is the many comments here stating that listings of sold houses still showing up on other sites not under your control can be considered false advertising.

Is this true?  What do you do to protect yourself?

 

 

Support fellow Realtor Carolyn Capalbo.  Click here. 

Good issue.  My solution will be to not post the full address to IDX. 

If everyone followed the same practice... it would be good for everyone involved.

People would know they would have to go to the source and once they did they would get the current data.

 

I could see where this could be an issue, possibly we should discuss our marketing methods before hand.

Norma, Excellent post. You pose a great question. One that in time I'm sure will be regulated somehow. Hopefully this new home owner saw the extensive efforts of your marketing strategy and may look to you to get the property sold once again, should they decide to move on. I would!

This is a problem for some. I would certainly honor any request to remove information I've posted, but don't think I can control what happens beyond that point. The seller wants all the exposure we can give, and that's what we are hired to do.

Several years ago I questioned what photos can be taken for advertising purposes. Is an owners' consent needed for exterior shots of homes, businesses, events? The answer received was as long as the photos are taken on public property such as a street, no consent is needed. Of course, respect for privacy and safety needs to be considered. Any comments?

Flash-based virtual tours are a great tool for keeping a tight leash on your images when marketing online.  Instead of posting individual photos (which is time consuming anyway), you can post them all at once, using a link for the virtual tour, like this: http://www.home2market.com/20643.  Once you've sold the home, simply deactivate the tour. and all it (and all its images) no longer appear online.  

That is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard.  What if they had called you and requested that you go and retrieve every copy of, "Homes & Land" magazine, "The New York Times," and "The Real Estate Guide," where you had posted the same information and photos.  Would you now be driving around the country and preparing to circumnavigate the globe to acquire all of those ads?  What if the person with the magazine didn't want to give it back to you?  Would you mount a covert, Mission Impossible, style assault on the subscriber's home to recover the rouge printed material in question?

The only down side I see to that information floating around the internet randomly is that Buyers tend to find it and think the home is available, just as they do with outdated copies of the magazines.  (Does anyone still advertise in a print mag?)  Of course if they were working with a talented Buyer's Agent they would know that is not the case and they would be finding a home they loved, instead of looking at ones they can't buy.

I suppose this is one of those cases where you can go the extra mile as long as its an isolated request.  If it became common - no way!

Maybe there is an IT development project here - invent a spyder that will both identify and remove all traces on request.  But then - where is the control button to be sure that the person asking for removal is authorizd?  Problems, problems...

I've run into this problem before with rental listings that people call on.  "I'm sure that you have this listing" they say.  The problem is that our rental listings get syndicated to over 40 sites and some of these sites do not know when the property has been rented, withdrawn, expired or cancelled.  Multiply that by the number of rental agents in the city of Boston that replicate our listings for advertising on Craigslist, and you have information out there that you weren't even aware was sitting in cyber space. 

I think what is going to happen is that property photos are going to become much more "staged" and more emphasis is going to be placed on interactive floorplans, where the pictures are resident and not sent to the syndicated channels.

I recently had a new buyer (I represented the seller) get upset because I included the price paid in a "just sold" postcard.  I assured them that the price they paid was public record and could be found in any number of places...they didn't have anything to say after that.  It never occurred to me, and that was the first time in 9 years of doing that, that anyone complained. It did, for the first time, though, raise a question in my mind if they had a point.  In this day of digital sharing, and a forever impression on the internet, I don't see how we can possiby control everywhere a listing might end up.  Your work to erradicate the home from all possible places is commendable and above and beyond.

I often wonder about this when posting info about properties, and try to keep it in mind that at some point a new buyer will have concerns about how much info is out there.  Nothing really private should ever be posted.

Hi Norma,  Obviously an amazing topic and comment thread.  I scanned most of the comments and didn't see anyone with a smart bit of software which would hunt down listing info and delete it.  Not sure a "Google" search would get everything !

Just as someone placing something questionable on Facebook and then wanting to retreive it and erase it, soory but the viral nature of the internet means it will always be out there.  Dont post anything you dont want seen and get sign off from the seller that the data can be posted on the internet and then it is out of your control.

Wow Norma, a topic that really has hit a cord...  I think I'm comment #211!!  We had this happen once - hardest was getting it off the larger .com real estate sites.  But with a bit of tenacity - got it done.  We now have the sellers sign a disclosure saying that they know it will be all over the net (which is what they WANT when selling)...  but the buyers.  Now that's a whole different problem. 

I recently received a call from an agent wanting to know if I still had a listing she said she had someone call but she could not find it in our local MLS. The listing she was talking about was listed in 2006 and had sold twice! Somehow, someone found it in cyberspace! I did do a "Google" search with address and every way I could think of to find this listing and could not.

At the time of listing I was a new agent and didn't know enough places to advertise except our local MLS and the company's website so it is anyone's guess as to how long this stays in cyberspace. We as agents do need to keep a journal where we advertise each listing and then go back to state that it has been sold as we post in our local MLS it is sold. This is a plus for us to show it sold.

I do find the topic interesting because we do not have control over cyberspace so where does our responsibility end? As we know there is a lot of misinformation out there.

 

There is no computer program that is going to go to other websites and delete their content, whether they own it or not.  If a site doesn't remove content you need to hire a lawyer.  That's why YouTube is still a free for all. 

If you would like to get an idea of where google gets listings from:  Go to google maps, type in a town, click on the "more" box and select real estate.

 

You didn't have his house up all over the internet. You had the seller's house on the internet with permission to have pictures up. You gave the new owner permission to question you and demand more of you when you quickly responded and took things down immediately -- signaling you were wrong or weren't sure if you were wrong.

We can't take responsibility for all the places a listing ends up on. We should remove old listings or mark them as sold from where we posted, but our posts are then fed to many other sites and we aren't responsible for that. That's like saying someone took a picture of me, posted it and it got picked up all over. Now I want them to go find every place that picked it up on the internet and get it removed. Not happening.

Wow, great post. I guess we take it for granted that when we take the house off our sites, it mysteriously goes away from the rest... Have to pay more attention.

Thank you for bringing this issue to everyone's attention. 

It's easy to loose the gripe how quickly things spread over the net, once they are there... 

At the same time, when you think about facebook, where  people readily post their personal info for many to see - including sensitive things like Birthday and hometown, and schools you went to - these facts are identity theft material. These are answers to security questions you are asked on your bank's site, to retrieve the password. I find it more dangerous, than pictures of the house. 

I believe, too, that if buyer wants to remove all traces possible from the net, s/he has the right for it. But there's only so much we can do. even if we copyright every image, make it impossibel to right click so that you can't save it to your desktop, one can take a screen shot, crop out the pic and have it on their file. Rename it and use it again on the net. We have no control over what people might have saved in their computers. Unfortunately...

Wow.  I like the policy of I can take it off of my sites, but that is it.

Just to clarify:  You control who sees your Facebook account and what is put on that account.

I too have encountered this issue. Now I'm the photographer and it clearly states on my website that after the home is sold that I own all the intellectual property rights to all of my photographs and can do with them as I see fit yet the buyer still chooses to search the internet for the photos. I had a set of photos on my flickr page which I do not advertise freely and the buyer found the photos and sent me a private message on flickr of the same thing. All I did was remove the set title and the address and a couple of the photos which I no longer wanted in my stream but I kept the photos that I received good comments on.

Now I can understand where privacy might be a concern but seriously though think about it. Are these buyers so afraid that theives might be studying listing photos in search for weaknesses for points of entry? Now come on breaking and entering is a pretty crappy crime to spend hours looking at photos of listings especially when the listing photos show features of the home and not doorways and entrances.

Now on the other side of the coin you'd think the buyer would be proud of their purchase that it wouldnt matter who looked at these photos but I suppose some people have an inferiority complex and might feel embarassed by their purchase?

Personally I think this whole removal of photos on the internet is a bit over paranoid if you ask me. Out of the thousands of homes on all over the internet nobody should be worried about the privacy of their home. Removing the address is more than enough. And continued harassment nagging about the photos quite frankly annoys me.

Time to put up a large disclaimer page on my website.

I agree with Bev above, I posted to my local MLS with the permission of the seller when I listed the home.    Every other site that has it now picked it up thru syndication.  I can't remove the posting from my local MLS whether it sold, expired or is withdrawn, and as long as it it there it will syndicate to other sites.

 

Thanks, Spotlight Realty, for your comment above: if asked to take all the pictures off the internet, I'd tell them to go talk to the internet about that...

 

That really is a ridiculous request, anybody asking has no clue.

 

Great post.  In Georgia we have part section in the listing agreement that allows the seller to limit their homes internet exposure but I haven't experienced anyone requesting that be done since they understand it helps sell their porperty.  However, I have had internet sites show vacant property with furniture in it from when it was listed two years ago (by another broker) and was occupied.  How are they getting that information.

It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out since so many sites take the data and reformat it to their purpose and take no responsibility to remove it.   

I hadn't thought about getting the home OFF the internet.  We try so hard to get it out to as many sites as possible.  Food for thought.

I'm not a Realtor, but Real Estate Syndication through Social Media and Internet Marketing is how I make my living.  I run into this problem everyday, and although it's possible to take some sites off, you will never get all of them as you mentioned. 

Furthermore, you would never want to remove anything off of the web if it back-links to your website and is positive... especially anything that is relevant what your site is about or what you do.  Everytime that your website or name is mentioned from outside sources, you are getting extremely valuable SEO power or "Google Juice" and are effectively moving your site closer to that elusive first page of search engines. 

Many of us in the Social Media Industry like to call this the "Lottery Effect".  For example, if your chances of winning on a scratch ticket are "1 in 20" and you buy "10" tickets, your chances of winning are much better than if you bought only "1".  In the Internet game... the more mentions of your name, brand or website that are out there from different sources; the closer you are of winning the top spot for what people are searching for everyday.

For this particular issue you went way above and beyond for this person, and I really appreciate your willingness to satisfy a potential client.

Good Luck to you, and Happy Selling!

Nathan Strauch

I've had this request from other agents sellers and buyers. Unfortunately if I wasn't the one to post the material or even affiliated with the transaction I don't feel I should have to remove their home. I polietly referred them back to their agent.

Norma, I can't even imagine how diificult it would be to erase a property from the internet. Don't think I would do it. Even if I were able to find everything and delete it the property would still be on the internet. Heck just go to street view on Google earth and you can walk right up to their front door.

I thought it is not legal for property ads to remain in tact after the property is sold. I would think that if certain sites do not remove "sold" properties or expired listings then they should be held responsible. After the first legal attempt, I'm sure the majority of such sites would not want to be sued and possibly shut down.

 

On the other hand, from reviewing property ads from around the country on a regular basis, I see evidence of agents who fail to follow up on their current ads, let alone take the time to review those which are outdated.

That is rediculous. At the time the photos were taken, they did not own the home.

My grandparents own a property on the stilliguamish river. I remember growing up and spending many weekends out there camping. We had lots of memories. I'm sure during that time, we took many photos and videos on that property. What if I had posted those memories online to share with the world and what if the property had since been sold to someone. Those memories are still mine. The photos still belong to you. The new owner of the property did not purchase those photos when he purchased the home.

What if I made a multi million dollar record album of me playing my accoustic guitar. Then I sold my guitar on ebay. Does that mean that the proceeds of the sale of all those albums should now go to the new owner of the guitar since HIS guitar was what made that music? Of coarse not. That's just silly right? Well how is that any different.

Those photos are your property and those photos were taken and posted with permission of the owner at the time. The ONLY thing I think he could argue was that now that he is the owner, you no longer have permission to advertise that property for sale. Rightfully so, any advertisement marketing that home for sale, should be taken down, since it is no longer for sale. But as far as being required to take down a blog photo, I think that's a bit too much.

Wow, just one more obstacle we have to overcome.  If the government gets involved we will be watchdogs, like FIRPTA and all the other disclosures we are responsible to handle.  It seems all the modern marketing creates more work for us.

I agree with Jean Hanley's comment:  "Well, I personally do not feel that it will compromise their security at all.  And, I don't feel that we have to go back and undue all the marketing that we did to get the house sold."  The purchase and related information is a matter of public record.

Great topic - one that we'll be talking about for a while...

Norma, you really went above and beyond on that one! We do keep track of where we post our listings, but then they go viral and you don't know where they are - just because you go back and remove them doesn't mean it happens all the way down the line. And like others have said, Trulia and Zillow keep them as comps! Somebody up the line said it...another disclosure coming...

Norma,

This is probably going become a big issue down the road, if it already isn't there. After a few costly lawsuits the regulation will predictably require all Internet and other marketing material of old listings to be removed.

Excellent point, wonder if our NAR reps are looking into this.   Now please erase this and all comments received and any links.

Norma - excellent point for conversation here. It is difficult to find out everywhere it is because it does get picked up by different sites.

Norma,

Very thought provoking post. I've read most of the comments and come to realize that this is a Pandora's box.

You did quite a bit about it, perhaps more than you should have to, and at the same time like a lot of people have mentioned, there are SOOOO many ways that one could get in the way of "your privacy" that it's impossible to keep track of everything.

I love street view on Google Earth and I use it ALL the time. Same with Virtual Earth. How's that any different? Also, the thought of the info being in different parts of the world like in Russia or France or...what do you do then?

Norma- Wow, look at all of the comments that were generated.  I'm going to have to go back and read them all.  Ginger re-blogged this is Stage It Forward, and I'm glad because we too place photos in our blogs and on our websites. 

I can see this never going away. Jerry Gray CRB,CRS,GRI,SFR / Allen Tate Realtors / Winston Salem, NC / 336-918-2433

Last time I checked Google's satillite photo of my home  - not even google earth - I could see my back yard, my deck, my patio furniture - my cars and one of my dogs in the yard.  Ok - the dog is white - so I knew what it was.  I could see the skylight of my kitchen and the car, you could see the line of the driveway and how it reaches way back into the property.  If buyers are that paranoid - they had better not look at what is simply public domain.  Are they going to sue google?  That issue was put to bed a while back.   Home owners have no recourse in this case. So why should agents have this responsibility if the photos are already almost everywhere anyone would care to look?

The point is that there is no hiding from this stuff. Trying to is a waste of time.

Amazing another part of our job descriptions!  SLEUTHS!

It is unlikely we will ever be able to remove all traces of a listing.  Joy

This is a great topic. I think this is a cultural and generaltional change that people are going to have to come to terms with. Information on the information super hi-way is forever. There are probably 100's of site that still have his home listed. I commend you for trying, but it was unrealitic and naive of that buyer in the first place to believe such a thing was possible.

This is a very good point. I never even thought of that. It can be a very time consuming job to do so. I can just imagine how far the internet will push our online marketing. With all the online marketing we do it could be difficult to identify where everything is. You also have a good point, what is our duty as Realtors to remove all of those ads?

Jean Richer
Ottawa, ON

Totally daunting! I can not imagine trying to get all the information of the sites. Once online maybe always online? I have heard the internet is forever. 

I had a seller where the listing expired and they asked me to 'remove it' from the internet.  I reminded her about the marketing plan and how I explained a lot of the sites are beta sites and I have no control over changing or removing the listing.  I checked all the sites i had control over and the only one still active was youtube, so I removed it. But our listings will be out there forever!

Not sure how one would remove a listing from all sources.  I don't think some of the different sites want them removed. 

Great post and comment thread.

Perhaps we can adopt a system, like on Mission Impossible: "This photo will self-destruct in 180 Days."  Also, remember another line from that series: "Your mission, should you decide to accept it..."  

Truly, it may bring about another "hold-harmless" clause in our contracts!!!

We are in the midst of an ongoing revolution, with the development of the Internet and the World Wide Web. We're going to have to come up with new tools and new approaches to deal with the "monster" we've created. As wonderful as the 'Net is for marketing (and it is fantastic), there is definitely a privacy issue that needs to be addressed...probably with somethng new we haven't thought of yet.

If it's just photos without an address, that's not such a problem. Information that can't be attached to a specific home or family or address is probably not an issue. But when you have the whole enchilada, the buyer (or seller, if the listing expires without being sold) may well feel his or her privacy has been violated.

I don't know the answer, but it might well be something like a "self-expiring blog" like someone upstream mentioned. Or an embedded bit of code that deletes a layout after X months or Y amount of inactivity.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention.  You addressed the concern extremely well.  Margaret C.

I totally understand why a new home owner would want there information removed from the internet.  Not only do you have to worry about petty criminals breaking into your home, scam artist use this information for phoney rental scams and other underhanded schemes.  Unfortunately, this is a new hazard in real estate for sometime to come.

I can understand the concern of home buyers.  It is my understanding that some information cannot be removed.

The average person does not realize the scope & functions of the true internet. I often explain it to them that it's like taking ripples out of a pool. Often times the effort to "remove" the data will cause more ripples than there was originally. Many don't realize the backing up & redundancy of internet servers, search engine logging etc. You might take away the "easy" to modify data but there will forever be "images" of the data all over the internet.

I've been fielding quite a few calls & emails from people that don't understand that sales data is public record and the number of sites that are "crawlable" continue to grow every year and the best they can ever hope for going forward is to manage what information is shown and that not all hosts will be as accomodating especially ones not located in the United Satates or North America.

Wonder how these average people will be when they see the NAR RPR offering coming soon. I don't think without a MAJOR shift in public policy, laws & regulations we'll ever get the genie back in the bottle.

greetings--

did a separate follow -up post-- on my blog-- and ref. you. --- mine was  -- "You don't have the listing but the Internet says you do"--- some similar issues -- trying to get stuff off the net-- in my case -- I didn't even have the listing--!!!   That  makes it even harder -- when major listing sites -- cross you over.        ----andrea

 

Great work.  I think you made the ethical move on this one.  Good lesson for all agents as well, thanks for sharing.  That client is in the minority, but I am curious if there will be more of this to come as we move forward with the social media trend?

-Keith

I had a buyer make a similar request when he found listing information on the internet.  I advised that it was a site that had grabbed it from MLS and there was no way for me to remove it. 

With all this old information out there, buyers should think twice about how reliable it is when they do their searches.

Great comments, everyone! 

My takeaway lesson on this experience is to continue to make outstanding customer service my number one marketing tool, and to make certain parties to the contract understand the Internet Geni is out of the bottle and may pop up in places beyond my control. 

Again, thank you for your participation and contributions to this post.

Norma,

I had never thought of a buyer making a request like this.

I can see the posibilities of a law suit.  I guess we will not need to have a buyer sign a disclosure about their property may be out there in the cyber world.

Terrific blog and a very interesting topic.  Definitely an area that regulators will get around to at some point.  Wondering if anyone at NAR is looking into this to get ahead of the curve to prevent legislation from adding additional burdens on an industry that is already taxed? 

Wow, this is a good point.  My ads are all over the internet, and beyond my control!  I had someone call me about a listing I had based on an ad on "Hotpads" and I asked myself, "what web site is that, and how did they get my ad?"  Crazy.

Good Lord Norma...

I haven't the time to read more than 250 comments. I hope I don't mimic anyone, but of course we're going to have our share of Buyers who feel their safety and privacy is comprised. This is just one more reason that when I sell any homes I own, I vacate them. I do it because I don't want all my belongings thrown all over CyperSpace. They don't belong there. I think the Buyer has a legit concern. It's an icky feeling when you feel are being voilated. Perhaps many folks would need to be there to actually understand it.

TLW...ROAR!

DANG thats a lot of comments, a full time job to digest them all!  Have a great weekend

Norma, this would be 'virtually' impossible! We all commend you for what you were able to do, however. This gives new meaning to the reality that our jobs are never over after closing...

For this reason in our office we do not put For Sale on our videos but tell people in the video to check our website to see details like availability and pricing. It is currently impossible to retract all the Internet marketing.

First this post has garnered some serious comments. Second that was one smart buyer. Glad it worked out.

Is this 'much ado about nothing' or is it a really valid concern? I like the idea of a time-ending on a posting but in reality this is a difficult challenge. As a home stager we too get our seller's permission to take Before & Afer photos and request a testimonial from them as well. We use these for our marketing purposes.

<!--Session data-->

Darryl #168 -- Ok, I'll just agree that you understand syndication, which you know is an agreement between licensed parties to publish listing info, but your craigslist issue truly has me baffled. Craigslist is not a syndication partner to the mls or any other IDX provider. Craigslist is an advertising service which does not accept IDX -- therefore it does not accept syndication. Craigslist keeps broker posted listings active for a week.....then, poof! the link to postlets or realbird is broken. If you are experiencing an old listing magically reappearing, someone has hijacked your listing info. Happened to me a year or two back -- some agent in the city was cloning my listings as her own, and publishing them "For rent", no less. When I sent in a complaint to Craigslist, they backtracked to her an anonymous email account and "poof" now she works, um, elsewhere....but not in real estate, as far as I can see.

Internet Sleuth...maybe we should add it to our business cards as a job description. So many companies post listings that do not belong to them; it's amazing, really.

It out there and no longer in your control.  We all need to get used to it.  Also careful about what is posted.

It out there and no longer in your control.  We all need to get used to it.  Also careful about what is posted.

In Ontario, continued advertising could only take place with the buyer's consent.

However, it remains on MLS for members only, and I really have no idea how you would be able to remove it from all those other sites. That's a virtually impossible task.

The great comments continue--thanks to all.

Some additional background on the property referenced:  It was still on my website but marked "Sold"  and old, but dated, blog posts were still active on my blog(s).

I believe prospective buyers will begin to pay more attention to the date a post was written--it's still about fresh content.

Norma,

 

I understand the Buyers frustration!  I transferred companies 6 YEARS AGO!  I still show up on the net with that company!  They threatened legal action; however it's in THEIR system and they can't find it!

UUGGHH!!!

 

I wonder what the legal ramifications are for this if you did not comply.  You could have removed any obvious mention, but going to the lenghts that you did to find every mention does not sound right.  You went above and beyond IMHO.

Jane - I hope there is an Internet scrub program available before I receive this request again. :) Although I made a serious effort, I'm sure it is still out there in cyberspace.

Norma, I feel your pain.  I have had the same situation happen to me and also had difficulity tracing down all the information that had gotten posted on sites I never knew of.  I understand where the new homeowner is coming from also.  As Professionals, we always desire to do the "right thing".  I have even found listings on sites that I don't speak the language. 

Norma,

I was very interested in reading your post.  As I had written a post back in October 2009 about Whoopi Goldberg buying a home in a gated community here in NJ.  Believe it or not, Whoopi contacted me last week DIRECTLY - no assistant, no secretary but Whoopi herself and asked me remove the post of her home.  Granted it was a little different because it wasn't my listing nor did I advertise the listing but I did have some pictures posted, not the address or her legal name or anything like that but I did include a link to the virtual tour of the home which was obviously the listing agent's virtual tour.  Whoopi was NOT at all happy with the virtual tour of her home being on the internet.  I didn't think of it at the time of posting but once speaking with her, she was extremely pleasant, a virtual tour can compromise someone's safety and privacy.  Not just of a celebrity but a robber can easily get an idea of the inside layout from a virtual tour.

 

Pat - I completely understand--when they said world wide web they were not kidding,

Gina - I will not be surprised if this becomes a common request, especially for the higher price point homes.

The only thing that we should do is mark the property as sold.

It's against the rules to advertise a  house that we no longer have a listing for.

Everything else is bull....When we can go into google earth and look into someones yard  why would we care about what the past owner had in the house

Virginia - I think there is a happy medium but I expect more "rules and regs" to arise in the coming years regarding this issue.

Wow ~ now that is an interesting discussion!

You did what I would have done and tried your best to accommodate.

I would think or hope we would not have too many folks who would care........

Has anyone else had this happen?

I think I will re blog this!

Joanne - Although the request was next to impossible, I think the effort I expended in an attempt to honor it was acknowledged and appreciated.  I hope this not a growing trend...

   I guess my question would be, does the same "viral" result happen if and when the listing is deleted from the primary sites? Meaning the same domino affect.  I know we want our information to be plastered on as many walls we can get them on, but is our repeated blog just a carbon copy or is it connected to the host somehow?  I sure hope these questions make sense...

Joe - It's complicated and I'm not sure I'm qualified to thoroughly answer your question.  I know the listing information migrated to a variety of sites--some beyond my control to gain access to and remove the information.

Norma - great article with lots to ponder. I wish I had seen this before! I haven't come up against this personally but would not be surprised if it does happen at some point.

There is still lots of public informaiton out there about homeowners that is out of our control - the tax records, Zillow and Trulia, and so on. There is likely only so much we can actually do and I'm not sure we are required to erradicate all evidence of the listing from the Internet. And even if we delete the post, or the individual blog site if used, there will still be information out there we cannot access or alter in Google's index.

I think it's fine to take care of those issues that one can do readily, but otherwise it is not a reasonable request. Terrific commentary and discussion.

Jeff

Another frustration is when I get a listing after another agent got fired, and the internet continues to show him as listing agent, with pictures that don't reflect current condition, wrong price, etc.    The owner really doesn't want that agent to have anything to do with the property, but I can't delete things I didn't put there.    Does an agent who no longer has a listing have any obligation to at least try to present a true picture by deleting the ones he can delete?    That's another can of worms.

I recently had a tenant ask why I was not giving him the opportunity to renew the lease after our one year agreement. I inquired why he assumed that and he replied that he saw the property for lease in a "Homes for Rent" website. Apparently this website pulled the lease listing from the MLS a year back without updating it once it was leased to him.

My main concern was why he was looking at that website in the first place. (? ? ?)

I have had an instance with a seller I had fired (because he was refusing to lower the price on his home and claiming it was not selling because it was UNDERPRICED) when he asked me to remove all the online advertising for his home because he was convinced I was using it as free advertising for myself.  He did not understand how listing are syndicated and that we don't always control or know where they end up.  The challenge was that it was everywhere and many times it was showing up at the original listing price, and did not reflect a price reduction.  A nightmare!

Mary - I've encountered that one too.  The previous agent left his ads up until it was time to renew the website.  Although he was no longer the listing agent he continued to advertise the listings online--yep, a new can of worms.

Steve - I believe one of the first things a consumer should look for is a date on any advertised listings.  The Internet contains lots of outdated information.

Well, I sure hope this "trend" doesn't catch-on!!!

Debbie - Yes, it was a surprise to receive the request.

Only 1 day after submitting my listing to the MLS and posting a blog on Activerain, I found out that the photos the seller had given to me were taken by the previous owners.  These previous owners asked me to remove the photos, which I did.  However, zillow, yahoo, realtor.com, trulia, etc. had all pulled this information into their respective sites.  Try as I might, I was not able to get rid of the photos.  I even submitted a new listing to the MLS, with new photos, and the real estate sites just used the old ones!  The previous owners harassed me every day, even calling the owner of Prudential CA Realty and accusing me of intellectual property theft, as well as going to my neighborhood around the listing and talking trash about me!  I had to hire an attorney who specialized in intellectual property and she put a stop to their harassment.    $150 worth of photos vs. $1000's of dollars in slander and libel fees stopped them in their tracks. 

Kathleen - Wow, your experience is one I hope I never experience!  I did my best to honor his request but as you said other sites pick up the information and photos and run with it.

I do not think you can be held responsible for actions of others.  In other words, if someone "lifts" the info, then they put it there and not you.  I would think you can only remove it from where you put it and those places that it can't be removed, it can't.  Just because a person sells a house does not eliminate the record of the sale at the county court house.  When a property sells several times, that history never goes away.

I know the MLS has "dealies" to put our listings out where ever they feel.  Perhaps they should also be concerned about pulling them.  Certainly, when the listing is over, no NEW ads or promotion should go forward. 

However, if it was a sale, you should be able to promote that for as long as it works for you.  I know I had a seller contact the board about advertising I did on a sale 18 months ago.  I was a compilation mailer into the neighborhood of sales I had and this home sold for more than list.  The result was, it sold for more than list, that sale always did, and it always will.   So as long as it is truthful, I could use that "sale."

I think any request to remove something you never put out there, is not your concern.

The internet footprint we leave never leaves us :)

Kathleen - Thanks for sharing your experience with a similar request.  I'm sure there will soon be "case studies" on the subject.

John - Thanks for your thoughtful comment--I agree, our Internet footprint is part of our legacy.