Zillow Sued By Homeowner Because Its Estimate Is Lower Than The Seller Wants To Sell The House For
from the sellersmarket.com dept
Real estate site Zillow is getting sued. Again. The company has already been sued for trade secret theft, copyright infringement, and settled multiple lawsuits related to harassment and other workplace violations. This time it's getting sued for handing out a "Zestimate" the plaintiff feels is too low.
Barbara Andersen, an Illinois resident and real estate litigation attorney, is asking the court to force Zillow to take down its estimate of her home's value, which she believes is incorrect.
According to Andersen, Zillow falsely stated her home sold for $685,000 last fall. Most recently, it appraised the home at $562,000, a $90,000 drop in just six months, the lawsuit states.
She says she has repeatedly reached out to Zillow, and written to its legal department seeking removal or amendment of the Zestimate, but her communications were ignored.
Andersen is attempting to make Zillow subject to Illinois real estate law, even though, as she notes in her lawsuit, Zillow doesn't actually perform appraisals. Appraising without a license is illegal in Illinois, but this assertion seems to be undercut by Andersen's quoting of Zillow's extensive disclaimer. From the filing [PDF]:
In describing its "zestimate", Zillow denies that it is an "appraisal". A copy of their webpage description is attached hereto as Exhibit A. However, Zillow concedes that it is an estimate as to market value and is promoted as a tool for potential buyers to use in assessing market value of a given property. As such, despite their disclaimer, Zillow's zestimate meets the definition of an appraisal under Illinois law. As such, Zillow should not be engaging in this business practice without a valid appraisal license and, further, the consent of the homeowner.
But according to the law she cites, Zillow would have to refer to its "zestimates" as appraisals and/or infer that it's licensed in the state to perform appraisals. It doesn't do either of those things. Buyers browsing the site may believe the estimates are actually appraisals, but Zillow doesn't present these as anything other than estimates.
This is a somewhat novel use of state licensing laws against Zillow. Normally, it's been real estate brokers threatening lawsuits or legal action, hoping to lock Zillow out of the local housing market. In this case, though, it's a homeowner who can't sell her house and is hoping to hold Zillow responsible for the lack of interested buyers. Since it's unlikely Zillow is solely to blame for Andersen being unable to make back what she paid for the home, there are more than a few questionable assertions in her complaint.
Since the recession, Andersen has been attempting to sell her home on different occasions. However, a tremendous roadblock to same has been the fact that Zillow posts a "zestimate" of person's homes without their permission, consent and/or any license to do so…
Andersen doesn't explain why she feels Zillow should legally be obligated to obtain permission from homeowners before posting its estimates. Nor does she attempt to link the multiple failed sales attempts with Zillow's zestimates, other than implying (in a very conclusory manner) that price fluctuations in Zillow's listing are keeping buyers away -- even when the "zestimate" was higher than her asking price. She also states she's been doing this "since the recession," which suggests she's been in the process of selling the house for a very long time -- a time where apparently Zillow's estimates were having zero negative effect at all on potential buyers (i.e., when Zillow's estimates aligned better with Andersen's view of the house's value).
Then there's this part, which suggests her inability to sell might be completely unrelated to Zillow's estimate.
[I]n the last months, Andersen decided to lower her asking price and terminate her broker (in order to reduce closing expenses). At approximately that point in time, the zestimate suddenly started to plummet. Now the zestimate is effectively that of the new construction homes described i.e. with no reflection of the superior locale, etc. as noted above.
Correlation isn't causation, but the complaint asks the judge to believe that it is. Andersen's arguments are further undermined by similarly threadbare assertions. For example, this paragraph of the suit suggests Andersen's view of her house's value is perhaps TOO subjective:
After the recession concluded, Glenview allowed new construction. Those homes have approximately the same square footage as Andersen. However, they are located in a less desirable (more condensed homes, busy streets, by Willow Creek Church, by a cemetery and less desirable golf course) and further removed area of the Glen Town Center. The only similarity of these homes is that they gave themselves the label of being located within the Glen.
The suit also contains allegations Zillow lowers estimates when sellers don't use brokers, since one of Zillow's revenue streams is partnerships with brokers. Maybe this is true, but the lawsuit contains nothing that backs up the claim other than stuff like the paragraph above.
Whatever's really happening at Zillow, it's unlikely the site is solely -- or even chiefly -- responsible for any seller's inability to sell their property. Zillow may have a larger share of the estimate market than its competitors, but it's hardly the only company in the business. Andersen claims Zillow will suffer no harm by delisting her property or changing the estimate to reflect her idea of what the asking price should be, but it's hard to see how this could possibly be true. If the site is viewed as being solely reflective of sellers' desired asking prices, it has zero value to anyone looking to purchase a house.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: barbara andersen, estimates, home sales, lawsuits, opinions, real estate
Companies: zillow
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Zillow = bad
Considering how awful they seem to be at estimating things, I'd rather they didn't do it, but a lawsuit doesn't seem to be the right way to go about it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zillow = bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Zillow = bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Zillow = bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Zillow = bad
No, zillow says they update the information after you've claimed your home, but, the claim process is as easy as typing in the home owners name, and providing an email address. There is no online verification, even tho that's what they call it, and, when you do submit changes, they just jack up the estimate while ignoring valid corrections. I asked a real estate friend of mine about zillow and she said the word among real estate professionals is, it's a total joke.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Zillow = bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zillow = bad
How dare you have a moderate and reasonable approach to the matter at hand?
(For those who don't see it, I'm sarcastic there. More seriously, thanks for your detailed feedback on that company.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zillow = bad
The listing for my home first had the same incorrect information that the County initially did, but I had no problem claiming the house and they immediately accepted my correction, (with attendant adjustment in Zestimate.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zillow = bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Zillow = bad
Sellers use language like, "...three bedrooms and a den..." as an indicator that there is an additional room that the new homeowner may want to use as a bedroom.
Check to see what the classification standards are in your area.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Zillow = bad
Once it's a 'bedroom' then other regulations kick in, including a fire ladder for a high window, smoke/monoxide alarm, electrical outlets and lights, AFCI breakers ($$), etc.
More declared bedrooms typically comes with a higher tax assessment, so people rarely complain to the local tax authority while they are living there. They shouldn't be able to 'fix' the description when they want to sell. Certainly Zillow shouldn't be on the hook for their tax evasion, failing to get proper building permits, and zoning violations.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zillow = bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Zillow = bad
On the other hand, why is the onus on me (someone who doesn't use their damn site) to fix their info for them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Zillow = bad
If the information does't matter, such as if your premises aren't up for sale or rent, then why do you care about the accuracy of their real estate info? Sure, if it said that there had been a cult mass-suicide in the premises you might care because of general perception, but otherwise, why?
If you do care about the info, because your premises are up for sale or rent, then why isn't the onus on you to correct incorrect information? I mean, they aren't all-seeing such that they magically know the information they've obtained (presumably from official sources like local government building plans or taxation records) is wrong. Unless you tell them it's wrong, how are they supposed to know?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zillow = bad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zillow = bad
In an area where the housing stock is diverse or their are few transactions it varies from piss poor to laughable. I'm a Real Estate Broker in Sonoma County with a background in Appraisal.
"Zestimates" for country properties are useless at best, for city properties they are occasionally pretty close.
I'd like to see Zillow prominently publish their error range along with the "Zestmate"...in the past Zillow often provided a "Value Range" that made it clear how rigorous their methodology is... "$751,000 to $1,395,000" is one I recall.
And yes, it can make a big difference to a seller, I looked at a place in Sierra County that Zillow priced at $186K, two local Realtors and an Appraiser put it at $295k...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Zillow = bad
Yes the house five lots down went for 1/3 of what we were asking for, but that's because the family got foreclosed and it sat abandoned for over a year and got trashed. Using that as a data point to determine what a well taken care of house is worth because it's nearby and you (incorrectly) think it has the same number of bedrooms is stupid.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
When they sue, bring up their own statements that they do not do accurate appraisals of the properties they list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Redfin estimates it lower than Zillow. Trulia says she sold it in April of 2017 for more than $200k less than she bought it, so is she suing for having sold at a loss and blames Zillow (when other websites also list a lower value than she wanted)?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Of course...
That pretty much says it all, doesn't it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Of course...
Hmm, I guess with all the asset forfeiture, maybe it does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No matter what type of gatekeeper you are it seems pretty certain you'll be united in your hate of the internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I don't mind being a monkey wrench in their data. :)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If a company is making money off their website, they should at least be factual. The woman here says Zillow has the wrong selling price (Zillow falsely stated her home sold for $685,000 last fall.)
If they are just estimates (promoted as a tool for potential buyers to use in assessing market value of a given property) that is bullshit. Either they shouldn't list it because no one can rely on it (why would they if they are not somewhat accurate?) or they should again be factual.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
They are factually reporting the information they have. They aren't writing fiction. They aren't intentionally creating false estimates.
Making money off of the website doesn't come into play. You are a user, not a customer. They didn't contract to do an assessment for you.
There are plenty of actual evil companies and websites. This isn't one of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
In those cases publishing what the government has down as the transaction value is accurate reporting. They might not be accurate figures, but they are the official numbers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
First amendment?
How can a state limit who can provide opinions on a house's value? Surely that's a blatant violation of the 1st?
Remember the subprime mortgage meltdown and the fact that the ratings agencies claimed that their assessment of the mortgage assets was protected by the 1st amendment? How is this any different?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: First amendment?
If an expert tells you something "in their opinion" they can be held liable if they are wrong.
The rating agencies executives should have went to jail, just like the wall street scumbags.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: First amendment?
There is usually a legal difference between an opinion and advice.
Depending on the country/state's laws that is, but where I'm from:
An opinion is a non-expert giving, well, their opinion. Have a few drunks down the pub and someone says, "you know what...", or at a family dinner someone saying "I think that patio design looks good...", or "yeah, those stocks like good, you should totally buy them" is giving a non-actionable opinion.
However, if I go to an expert in a field, especially a licensed field, for example if I go to a licensed Engineer and asked them to provide a building report on the same patio design a family member reckoned was fine, what they are providing is expert advice. If the design is structurally unsound, and falls apart and hurts some people, then they could be accounted some measure of liability.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Complaint
No one asked for your commentary, particularly one not researched.
Barbara
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Complaint
At no point did the author of this article state that your seeking monetary relief. Did you even bother to read the article before attacking it?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Complaint
She was just nice about it.
Good for you Barb.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Complaint
The document attached to the article at the bottom clearly states VERIFIED COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTION, and the second paragraph reads that the lawsuit "is asking the court to force Zillow to take down its estimate of her home's value which she believes is incorrect".
I don't see where it claims the lawsuit is seeking monetary relief, and as for nonsense speculation... you're welcome to your opinion I guess, for whatever it's worth.
But I mean Zillow's focus is as a real estate aggregator that makes listings more accessible and visible. Its own website states that it can only give a rough estimate or a ballpark price in terms of houses in the area, based on publically available data, and shouldn't be used as a final selling price since a lot of factors they can't calculate are involved that affects the final price of a home.
https://www.zillow.com/zestimate/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Complaint
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Complaint
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Complaint
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zillow also takes in how much similar houses in your area sell and use that for their zestimates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
My realtor had a moment of panic when she learned my 3rd "bedroom" was in the basement, until I pointed out that my basement was "walk-out" -- with no steps, even -- in back. The bedroom had windows facing the back yard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Horror of horrors
Gods, no! Anything but that!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Horror of horrors
From my experience, cemeteries are little frequented, quiet places, and usually well-maintained and quite pretty (flowers, trees, lawns etc).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think "imply" is the correct word here?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I see this as being overly clever with definitions.
An appraisal is an estimate. But an estimate isn't necessarily an appraisal. Even if it has all of the regulatory attributes required of an appraisal, if they don't claim it's an appraisal, it's not an appraisal.
You can chat with a lawyer at a party, and they can offer up a person opinion. It might be advice, and it might be on a law-related topic, but that doesn't make it legal advice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is it just me?
Funny how that works!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Slander of Title
The complaint doesn't come out and use the archaic term, but the argument fits into an old, separate tort called "slander of title," which is just as it sounds -- saying that a property is worth less than it actually is.
Furthermore, the causation argument may be tenuous, but it's not as tenuous as Tim Cushing makes it out. Illinois accepts "substantial factor" tort causation, so the Zillow estimate need not be THE cause of any drop in price, just a "substantial" cause among many. We can argue back and forth about what evidence could support such a finding, but at the pleadings stage, one can't disprove substantial factor causation, and if a suit gets to discovery, it's far less ridiculous.
I don't know how the suit will eventually shake out, but at the outset, it seems like it actually pleads a real cause of action.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Focusing on a single data aggregation site, and bemoaning they don't value the items she feels matter much more in the overall view of the property.
Of course she immediately shows up and complains that people provide coverage without speaking to her or getting her approval. Its like she skipped constitutional law.
Perhaps it isn't Zillow ruining your chances of selling, but the simple fact you believe its worth more & can't force them to accept YOUR own biased assessment.
You can think its worth 2 million, you can not force the world to accept that. Besides your neighbors would be offended if you sold to someone unworthy of paying an inflated price you have in your head. They might treat the property how they wanted to & bring down all of the home values. You have to protect everyone from Zillow & not show an accurate assessment in your selling package.
You picked a battle poorly.
Given all of the faults you find with everyone else, and your assessment of less desirable aspects you might want to think that you are your own worst enemy in this. You have unrealistic expectations & rather than consider its you, you have found an outside force to blame for all of the ills you've suffered while ignoring your own hand in them.
Sorry you can't get as much for the house as you think you should be able to, but sometimes you need to take the loss and let it go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
People are obviously relying on the price listed by Zillow, if they didn't, then why would Zillow even put it up there?
We have a company here that is making money by giving out information that is wrong and they won't fix it. Their mistake (which they won't fix) is possibly costing an individual money. Why do douchbags like yourself believe that just because it is on the Internet, that a company should be allowed to wrong someone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's provided as a rough estimate of fair market value of a house, to get an idea of what homes in the area have sold for and to get a starting point when you're narrowing down a home search geographically. As Zillow's own website states, it's not considered an accurate appraisal, especially if the information it has is inaccurate (and they invite people to update accordingly) and that a proper appraisal is necessary to accurately determine the value. Furthermore, the estimates Zillow provide can't always take into account demand based on factors such as distance to schools, crime rates, etc.
If the asking price differs from the estimate then you can figure out why the asking price varies (is it because there's remodeling that Zillow hasn't factored in, is the area really popular for home buyers, is it simply overpriced, etc). Zillow is not an accurate individual home appraiser; it's a data aggregator that tries to consolidate public data and provide a rough, initial estimate of fair market value with very specific guidelines in regards to how statistically accurate (or inaccurate) that estimate is, but it simply isn't the same as an actual appraisal that looks at the house in-person and properly values the home.
This is a long-winded way of saying that just because you don't understand how and why something is done a certain way doesn't make it invalid or useless. It just means you don't understand it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
So since they are making money off of their information, there should be some standard of accuracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also pretty much everyone I know (who want to sell homes) self-evaluate them at "1 quintillion bajillion" dollars.
Mostly because of the (false) aura of "prosperity" attached to being a homeowner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's claiming something that reduces the value of a property, such as falsely claiming an ownership interest or falsely placing a lien on a property.
If you simplify it to "saying something that reduces the value of a property" that definition seems to fit, but over-simplification can lead to incorrect understanding.
I don't think "substantial factor" analysis should come into play until after the constitutionalissue is decided.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Slander of Title - Definition
I'm operating off Restatement (Second) of Torts § 624, "Disparagement of Property—Slander of Title":
"The rules on liability for the publication of an injurious falsehood stated in § 623A apply to the publication of a false statement disparaging another’s property rights in land, chattels or intangible things, that the publisher should recognize as likely to result in pecuniary harm to the other through the conduct of third persons in respect to the other’s interests in the property."
This folds in both the traditional "fake lien" tort and all sorts of commercial disparagement, such as Bose Corp. v. Consumers Union, 466 U.S. 485 (1984), where but for the NY Times v. Sullivan malice test saying something false about the way a speaker sounded was actionable.
I think "our special appraisal system considers the property to be X," where X is lower than the value of the property, is sufficiently disparaging to the interest in property to match.
I can tell you because I searched that there is no case on point in Illinois, but they do accept the Restatement.
As for substantial factor, yes, whether or not the statement is protected opinion would be first analyzed, but there was a separate question raised in the article that, even if it was defamatory, damages couldn't be proved. I think they might be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Slander of Title - Definition
I think the key phrase there is "disparaging another's property rights" - i.e., treating the idea that the other person owns this thing with scorn. Not disparaging the thing owned, but disparaging the rights in the thing owned - or in other words, making it appear questionable whether or not the person actually owns the property.
Claiming falsely that you have an ownership interest in (part of) the property places the other person's ownership of that property in question.
Claiming falsely that you hold a lien on (part of) the property places the other person's ownership of that property in question.
Et cetera.
What Zillow says about such properties does not seem to in any way raise questions about whether the seller actually owns the property being sold. As such, if I'm reading this right, the law you cite would not seem to apply.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Slander of Title - Definition
DB: I think "slander of title" is limited to the elements of the writ at common law.
Me: According to modern interpretations as set forth by the Restatement, slander of title also includes what might also be called "trade libel," which I think does include this case. From brief research which I won't bore you with, I know Illinois does allow for both kinds of actions, and this kind of action has never been specifically allowed or prohibited.
You: From my literal reading of the text of the Restatement, without reference to its interpretation over 40 years in Illinois case law, and not taking into account that the American Tort Reform Association considers Cook County, Illinois, sixth among its "judicial hellholes" where judges bend over backwards to give plaintiffs the benefit of the law, I'm going to say that your reading is obviously incorrect.
* * *
To simplify, given my experience in tort law (I used to sue people for money damages) and about 20 minutes with a legal database service using the skills I developed over 3 years of law school and 12 years of legal practice, I think this is a case a plaintiff could get away with, because I think a judge will reasonably find that "bad estimates" injures a person's ability to sell, which is a tort in Illinois. I think it's even more likely in Cook County, which is plaintiff-friendly.
As a matter of "good policy" or "common sense," you may be right. But don't assume that the law is on your side.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Then someone else offers 299,999 etc
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zestimate and Zillow
On 6/28/17, Zillow published its "Zestimate" of the home's value, of 187.7K.
On 7/5/17, I fired the realtor and retained a new realtor to sell my home.
On 7/14/17, one day before an open house was to take place, arranged by the new realtor, Zillow published a "Zestimate" for my home of 110K.
Please note: In the intervening 15 days, the public records did not change, my home did not fall into a sink hole, was not destroyed by a tornado, the solar panels continued ro work, etc., so the house and information available to Zillow remained unchanged, however, the Zestimate dropped by over 70K..........and only 2 families showed for the open house.
Erin, at Zillow, offered my present realtor no explanation for the drastic and apparently arbitrary and capricious (and highly damaging) 70K+ Zestimate value drop......in 15 days.
Consequently, I must conclude that Zillow's Zestimates are utter and complete hogwash, or whoever inputted the figures for the second Zestimate was using controlled substances, hit some bad keys, or Zillow's algorithm crashed.
If Zillow does not correct this and tender a published apology, I will file suit and also notify the AG of the Commonwealth to obtain redress.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Zestimate and Zillow
In my own instance two mirror units in a four condo setup. The neighbor's unit is our mirror layout but we have complete upgrades on everything compared to base on that unit. That unit is rented out so taxes are different. That unit is appraised at 179k and my unit at 162k. We are looking to rent or sell due to relocation. They've never lived there. We've lived here for 8 years. Their unit has been abused by renters. Our has been lovingly been taken care of. In every respect ours is a better unit than theirs. So go and explain the zestimate. Remember exact mirror layout plan. But complete upgrades in our compared to that unit. Can't explain the zestimate. And no adjustments in information makes a difference with the zestimate. And no way to reach out and talk to someone from Zillow. They are a scam.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]