Q: We’ve been looking at houses for a few months and I am so amazed at how many of them turn out to be nothing like the photos on the Internet.

A few are actually nicer in person than the crummy photos online, and a few are about what I expected. But some of them are just plain misrepresented. I’ve seen these glamour shots of a breathtaking view that’s really only visible from across the street, not from the house, and pictures of huge yards that turn out to be tiny. I’ve even seen photos of these great back yards but the photos don’t show that the front of the house is 20 feet from a busy road. How can agents get away with that?

A: It’s often hard to draw the line between what the industry calls “puffing” or making something look a little better than it is, and misrepresentation. Most of us in the industry tolerate a certain amount of “puffing” since we know it’s the listing agent’s job to try to make the property appealing.

What often happens, however, is that when potential buyers see the property, they not only lose interest in the house when it doesn’t look like what they expected, but they lose respect for the agent who listed the house and even the one showing it to them. In a worst case scenario they lose confidence in all real estate professionals.

There are actually a few places currently on the market where “creative photography” has probably gone far enough to be called misrepresentation. A beautiful view that’s only visible from the top of the roof is not a view. A small yard shot with a fisheye lens to look expansive is a false picture.
While I sympathize with listing agents who are trying to help a seller who has a less than attractive property, I try to make sure that my clients get the real picture. There is a buyer out there for every property if it is well priced and every property has some good features that can be emphasized.