Altered photos: Removing the real from real estate |
|
|
|
"When he walked into the backyard, he looked
at the utility lines, then at the photo, looked at the adobe wall,
then back at the photo," Wilson says. "The guy was British
and typically very civilized, but he got pretty nasty right then
in the backyard."
The millionaire filed a complaint with the National
Board of Realtors, and the agent almost got his license revoked.
Wilson suggests that sellers and their agents try
not to make the house look too pretty or too good.
"It's kosher to Photoshop out a garden hose mistakenly
laying out on the front lawn, or make a sunset look more colorful.
It's another thing to remove trees and make the neighbor's house
look four acres away instead of right next door."
Not all real estate agents cross the line like the
one in Santa Fe. Many agents, and the visual experts they use, have
their own code of ethics for how and why they'll use Photoshop on
listing photos.
Michael Brubaker, a project manager for the Gritikis
Group in Savannah, Ga., says the line "this photo has been
visually enhanced" accompanies each altered photo on the firm's
Internet real estate listings. Also, before a visual designer makes
big changes, like erasing graffiti on the street or removing bushes
from a yard, the seller must promise to actually take the steps
to remove the eyesores in reality. "We take steps to document
their actions because the ethical part for us is whether they do
it or not," says Brubaker.
Is it legal?
If home buyers feel duped by sellers and their agents, do they have
legal recourse? State laws differ, but in most cases, the law pertains
to verbal disclosure to give an accurate sense of the property.
For example, if a seller is showing a house in summer or fall, he
must legally disclose to buyers that it may experience flooding
during heavy rain in the springtime.
Showing injury due to an altered photo is another
matter, says Holmen from the NAR.
"If the buyer wants to raise a legal claim, he
must show material representation that the photo caused him to be
injured," he says. "If he says he was duped by a bush
airbrushed out of a backyard photo, what is there to do? You cut
down the bush. After seeing a photo, the buyer will eventually see
the house and notice the differences anyway."
John O'Brien, chairman of the Illinois Real Estate
Lawyer Association, agrees, saying that overuse of Photoshop only
approaches an ethical line instead of a legal line right now.
"Advertising is held to be boasting and bragging,
not to be taken as holy writ in many states. Consumers should have
enough sense to know to visit the house and do their due diligence
on the condition of the property. At least for now, power lines
are not the thing that will cross the line into reason for a lawsuit."
Vanessa
Richardson is a freelance writer based in San Francisco. | 
