- Find a Real Estate Professional
- Realtors®
- Mortgage Lenders
- Home Improvement Pros
- Other Real Estate Services
- Review an Agent, Lender or Pro
- Marketing on Zillow
- Real Estate Agent Advertising
- Join the Professional Directory
- Popular
- Real Estate Market Reports
- More
- Pasadenan
- Contributions:21466
"Zillow needs to do the right thing and give the power to rate agents only to those people who have actually worked with the agent,..." -
I believe that "is" the policy and has been from the beginning. If one got a review from some other party that was not a client, is should be flagged for removal.
I believe that "is" the policy and has been from the beginning. If one got a review from some other party that was not a client, is should be flagged for removal.
- Hamp Yonce, "Zilluminati"
- Contributions:3463
It should never be posted.
It shouldn't have to be flagged for removal.
Allowing that to happen is not responsible media.
Chastising your customer is asinine. The gall required, to even think that is appropriate, is disturbing.
It shouldn't have to be flagged for removal.
Allowing that to happen is not responsible media.
Chastising your customer is asinine. The gall required, to even think that is appropriate, is disturbing.
- Pasadenan
- Contributions:21466
If someone lies and states they were the client when the weren't, and there was no response from the agent when questioned, how would one know without checking all HUD-1 forms? And even if one did have access to those, (which I don't think they could), it still doesn't say anything about a client that terminated the relationship prior to completing the expected transaction.
Ideally, they should just scrap the "reviews" on the site as there is no verification process available to make them "useful" to most consumers. But I stated that even before they decided to implement them.
I can think of a lot more useful things those staff resources presently used for then reviewing agent reviews.
Ideally, they should just scrap the "reviews" on the site as there is no verification process available to make them "useful" to most consumers. But I stated that even before they decided to implement them.
I can think of a lot more useful things those staff resources presently used for then reviewing agent reviews.
- Tug of War
- Contributions:1974
I find the Definition of "Worked with" interesting, it seems to be a fairly loose one which makes me wonder what they actually consider a Client
I would think those Definitions would impact the number of both 5 Star Reviews and 1 Star Reviews posted
I would think those Definitions would impact the number of both 5 Star Reviews and 1 Star Reviews posted
- Hamp Yonce, "Zilluminati"
- Contributions:3463
In Realtor speak you're not a "Client", until you sign an Agency agreement hiring the Agent. I'm in agreement with that interpretation. Anyone else is a "customer", in Realtorease.
Zillow appears to be holding REA's, to calling anyone who clicks the "Contact" button, on an Agent's profile, a client. That is too far. The clicker could be anybody.
Zillow appears to be holding REA's, to calling anyone who clicks the "Contact" button, on an Agent's profile, a client. That is too far. The clicker could be anybody.
- Michael Procopio, "mike_procopio"
- Contributions:31
I think this was in relation to a contact generated by zillow, not a random review. If that is the case, that people who "inquire" via zillow then have a chance to review, then this is an asinine policy, especially considering the many bots that roam zillow sending auto inquiries.
Reviews from genuine clients and customers should be the ONLY reviews.
Best,
Mike
Reviews from genuine clients and customers should be the ONLY reviews.
Best,
Mike
- Tug of War
- Contributions:1974
That's how it seems to me Hamp..
Since I just addressed you am I now a Client?
Off I go to send you an Email so I can Grade your Response time..
Then I 'm gonna email a whole bunch of Agents, write some quick Reviews & use up them Free Passes..and watch
It's the Second Upset Email Client/Review that kills ya
Agree Completely Michael..I would add I think that also should apply to Email Clients posting 5 Star Reviews
(They really responded fast to my Email 5 Stars)
Since I just addressed you am I now a Client?
Off I go to send you an Email so I can Grade your Response time..
Then I 'm gonna email a whole bunch of Agents, write some quick Reviews & use up them Free Passes..and watch
It's the Second Upset Email Client/Review that kills ya
Agree Completely Michael..I would add I think that also should apply to Email Clients posting 5 Star Reviews
(They really responded fast to my Email 5 Stars)
- Hamp Yonce, "Zilluminati"
- Contributions:3463
I don't advertise on Zillow, so they might not chastise me, or help me remove the review. Since I don't pay them at all, they may not even post a glowing review. I don't know, and don't care. I'm not here fishing. I'm just drinking beer and yelling. You may be able to start a media company called Illreviewyou.com. Tug of Reviews, maybe. Respond or Else?
- Tug of War
- Contributions:1974
It would take to much time away from my Trolling Zillow for Evil Purposes...
I say let the Agents keep writing their own Reviews!
- ConnieK_Oklahoma
- Contributions:2899
they ought to at least call them testimonies if they aren't going to ever scrap them because that is what they really are with a few exceptions of when a client finds someone and leaves a bad review.
then comes the loose definition of client- if the person dumped the REA, found another one and closed a deal with the new one....were they not still a client of the first one? no closing, but still a client that was unhappy so they cancelled the service. if that doesn't qualify as a reviewer, then it's not a review, its a testimony.
then comes the loose definition of client- if the person dumped the REA, found another one and closed a deal with the new one....were they not still a client of the first one? no closing, but still a client that was unhappy so they cancelled the service. if that doesn't qualify as a reviewer, then it's not a review, its a testimony.
- Pasadenan
- Contributions:21466
"...especially considering the many bots that roam Zillow sending auto inquiries." -
From a consumer perspective, the only ones that I've seen rooming Zillow for sending auto inquiries are a few agents that didn't bother to read the "terms of use". They especially seem to be sending calls, letters and E-mails to those that have "make me moves' or FSBO listings to try to "steal" the listing.
Perhaps some agents also do that for other agents sidetracking or annoying their competition?
I'm not sure what the purpose for a consumer to set up a bot would be.
But in any case, all robots are against Zillow's terms of use, and the profile should be flagged for deletion and the I.P. address blocked.
Does one really have evidence of many bots sending Auto-Emails on Zillow?
From a consumer perspective, the only ones that I've seen rooming Zillow for sending auto inquiries are a few agents that didn't bother to read the "terms of use". They especially seem to be sending calls, letters and E-mails to those that have "make me moves' or FSBO listings to try to "steal" the listing.
Perhaps some agents also do that for other agents sidetracking or annoying their competition?
I'm not sure what the purpose for a consumer to set up a bot would be.
But in any case, all robots are against Zillow's terms of use, and the profile should be flagged for deletion and the I.P. address blocked.
Does one really have evidence of many bots sending Auto-Emails on Zillow?
- ConnieK_Oklahoma
- Contributions:2899
@Pasa
no evidence here. I have recieved 519 contacts from zillow since Dec 15, 2010 which is more than the Oklahoma average (according to the little chart thing). I don't believe any of them to be bots. there were maybe 3 scammers wanting to pay cash for my property without seeing it, 6 or 7 private comments about a response I had made and the rest were real live web visitiors with actual inquiries or comments (not neccessarily clients- just inquiring people or contacts).
i would say....not many bots.
but...I wouldn't call all of those people clients either so the point he's trying to make still has some validity.
I just don't think client is defined necessarily as someone with whom you had a closing. but I don't offer a better definition either...
no evidence here. I have recieved 519 contacts from zillow since Dec 15, 2010 which is more than the Oklahoma average (according to the little chart thing). I don't believe any of them to be bots. there were maybe 3 scammers wanting to pay cash for my property without seeing it, 6 or 7 private comments about a response I had made and the rest were real live web visitiors with actual inquiries or comments (not neccessarily clients- just inquiring people or contacts).
i would say....not many bots.
but...I wouldn't call all of those people clients either so the point he's trying to make still has some validity.
I just don't think client is defined necessarily as someone with whom you had a closing. but I don't offer a better definition either...
- Pasadenan
- Contributions:21466
Fortunately, I don't think there is much risk of the scammers doing agent reviews, as they really don't want the publicity for the FBI or CIA to be investigating their illegal practices.
As for the standards that the Zillow reviewers use for reviewing agent reviews... I have no clue.. but I do suggest a simple definition for client/customer for qualifying for publishing a review:
1) For listing agent... either personally came to the house for a listing interview, or listed the house for a minimum of 1 day.
2) For selling agent.. physically showed someone at least one house opening the door for them, or had an exclusive buyer's agent agreement signed.
Phone calls and E-mail contacts would not be sufficient by themselves under any circumstances.
(The courts have made it pretty clear what "implied agency" is).
As for the standards that the Zillow reviewers use for reviewing agent reviews... I have no clue.. but I do suggest a simple definition for client/customer for qualifying for publishing a review:
1) For listing agent... either personally came to the house for a listing interview, or listed the house for a minimum of 1 day.
2) For selling agent.. physically showed someone at least one house opening the door for them, or had an exclusive buyer's agent agreement signed.
Phone calls and E-mail contacts would not be sufficient by themselves under any circumstances.
(The courts have made it pretty clear what "implied agency" is).
- Tug of War
- Contributions:1974
I find the Discussion/Comments on that Blog get pretty interesting...
My question is if the Complaint from Realtors is Bad Reviews need to be verified (was a client) does the same hold True for 5 Star Reviews?
And if an Anonymous person or anyone is Bad/Horrible/a Loser for posting a Untrue Bad Review..then what is an Agent that posts a Fake Review or is involved in gaming the Reviews?
What should be done about them?..or is it 2 different things?
My question is if the Complaint from Realtors is Bad Reviews need to be verified (was a client) does the same hold True for 5 Star Reviews?
And if an Anonymous person or anyone is Bad/Horrible/a Loser for posting a Untrue Bad Review..then what is an Agent that posts a Fake Review or is involved in gaming the Reviews?
What should be done about them?..or is it 2 different things?
- sunnyview
- Contributions:25139
I would prefer if Zillow limited reviews to clients who had actually worked with an agent for some period of time. I do not think that reviews should be limited to agents that they bought or sold a house with, but it should be at least limited to people who actually worked with the agent.
A once time phone call should not count at all. An email exchange should not either unless the person is willing to provide the actual email from the agent as verification.
A once time phone call should not count at all. An email exchange should not either unless the person is willing to provide the actual email from the agent as verification.
- Tug of War
- Contributions:1974
I think all would prefer but instead there is what Zillow Created...
It's a tad difficult for me to think Zillow cares one little bit about
"limited reviews to clients who had actually worked with an agent for some period of time" ...Real Reviews..Reviews with any Value to Consumers
They either defined/define "Client" the way they did for a reason or they are hopelessly suffering from a Major case of Mental Deficiency....
I mean really...you do not need a Thinking Cap to know that's a Stupid Definition and allows the creation of unfair Bad Reviews, Fake Reviews and/or 5 Star Reviews that pass their Definition of "Client"
And the Consumer is expected/told/has it suggested to them that they should weed through it all this type of BS to find it's Value..what a joke
IMO
It's a tad difficult for me to think Zillow cares one little bit about
"limited reviews to clients who had actually worked with an agent for some period of time" ...Real Reviews..Reviews with any Value to Consumers
They either defined/define "Client" the way they did for a reason or they are hopelessly suffering from a Major case of Mental Deficiency....
I mean really...you do not need a Thinking Cap to know that's a Stupid Definition and allows the creation of unfair Bad Reviews, Fake Reviews and/or 5 Star Reviews that pass their Definition of "Client"
And the Consumer is expected/told/has it suggested to them that they should weed through it all this type of BS to find it's Value..what a joke
IMO
- Kristin Acker, "Kristin Acker"
- Contributions:479
We've thought a lot about whether to include these reviews. In fact, our initial set of "services" which someone could be reviewed for didn't include this. The reason we added it is that many instances where a consumer reviewed someone who just plain didn't bother to respond. I remember one in particular where the agent hung up on the consumer, twice. We had to reject all of those (as we didn't have the right service to pick) and it wasn't in our stated policy.
After some debate (going over the same arguments you make above), we decided to add it. Why? We connect a lot of buyers with agents, we think if we have unresponsive agents, then we shouldn't encourage buyers to contact them. The reason we went with the "Free Pass" described above, was a way to give agents a chance to start responding to consumers Zillow sends them.
If you see a review on the live site for not responding, that agent has been reviewed TWICE for not responding (we reject the first one we see and send an e-mail to the agent). We believe consumers should be able to find out that this agent may not respond to you.
Even I could argue the other side, but at the end of the day, we want buyers & sellers on Zillow to have a great experience and find a great agent. That's one who responds to their inquiry.
Hope that explains our thinking a bit.
Kristin
After some debate (going over the same arguments you make above), we decided to add it. Why? We connect a lot of buyers with agents, we think if we have unresponsive agents, then we shouldn't encourage buyers to contact them. The reason we went with the "Free Pass" described above, was a way to give agents a chance to start responding to consumers Zillow sends them.
If you see a review on the live site for not responding, that agent has been reviewed TWICE for not responding (we reject the first one we see and send an e-mail to the agent). We believe consumers should be able to find out that this agent may not respond to you.
Even I could argue the other side, but at the end of the day, we want buyers & sellers on Zillow to have a great experience and find a great agent. That's one who responds to their inquiry.
Hope that explains our thinking a bit.
Kristin
- Tug of War
- Contributions:1974
It explains your (Zillow's) Thinking Kristin and I do as I sure all do appreciate you sharing it..Thank you
However I think I and many others if not most others will feel it is not Good Thinking for the Consumer, Agents or Zillow..
My advice/Thought..
Slap whoever is pushing this is as a good thing lightly but firmly on the Back of the Head and Ban them from using the Break Room for a Month
Just my Opinion
However I think I and many others if not most others will feel it is not Good Thinking for the Consumer, Agents or Zillow..
My advice/Thought..
Slap whoever is pushing this is as a good thing lightly but firmly on the Back of the Head and Ban them from using the Break Room for a Month
Just my Opinion
- Kristin Acker, "Kristin Acker"
- Contributions:479
Um, I pushed for it, amongst others.
I am very comfortable with the decision on behalf of transparency for the consumer. 'We try really hard to make it clear with each review the extent of the interaction and will let the consumer decide how to weigh a review of that ilk.
I think we'll just have to disagree on the wisdom of my/our position.
Kristin
I am very comfortable with the decision on behalf of transparency for the consumer. 'We try really hard to make it clear with each review the extent of the interaction and will let the consumer decide how to weigh a review of that ilk.
I think we'll just have to disagree on the wisdom of my/our position.
Kristin
- Tug of War
- Contributions:1974
OK.....I do disagree with the wisdom of your/their position but do appreciate you Posting it/Explaining it for all of us to see.
Thanks again
Thanks again
- Pasadenan
- Contributions:21466
Well, if the review is to measure "responsiveness to unknown questionable inquiries on Zillow" and not to measure "real estate transaction services", then it should be in a separate review category and not mixed in with client responses.
After all, no "small business" handles 3000 meaningless phone calls about services not offered by the business in areas outside of the service area. It would be a complete waste of resources. Small business have to have ways to filter out such unrelated time wasters.
Perhaps the site users should provide "reviews" for Zillow staff people based on the same "responsiveness" criterion? There are over 100 question posts that I have made on this forum that haven't received an answer from anyone let alone Zillow in over 4 years. Now what kind of rating do the Zillow staff people get for that? Negative 20 stars?
And really, should Agents be responding to harassment inquiries from other agents in entirely different service areas like JK at all?
Of course, I'm still of the opinion that there is no way to create a review system that doesn't promote gaming, manipulation and misrepresentation, thus I see no way that such a review system would be useful to most consumers regardless.
After all, no "small business" handles 3000 meaningless phone calls about services not offered by the business in areas outside of the service area. It would be a complete waste of resources. Small business have to have ways to filter out such unrelated time wasters.
Perhaps the site users should provide "reviews" for Zillow staff people based on the same "responsiveness" criterion? There are over 100 question posts that I have made on this forum that haven't received an answer from anyone let alone Zillow in over 4 years. Now what kind of rating do the Zillow staff people get for that? Negative 20 stars?
And really, should Agents be responding to harassment inquiries from other agents in entirely different service areas like JK at all?
Of course, I'm still of the opinion that there is no way to create a review system that doesn't promote gaming, manipulation and misrepresentation, thus I see no way that such a review system would be useful to most consumers regardless.
- wetdawgs
- Contributions:26854
In early September, I initiated contact with two Premier agents related to selling a home using the "interesting in selling home" contact feature on one of my "claimed" homes.
Neither of them responded.
Last week I received a request from the Zillow automated system asking for a review of one of them. It wasn't obvious that there was an option for "did not respond to query" until digging deeply through the various options in the review. (And it was only with someone else's comment that made me realize that there may be such an option.)
Therefore, as I tend to test systems (being a skeptic from my little toe to the top of my head) I filled out the review and said that the agent didn't respond to my query and I could not evaluate whether this was an agent's lack of responsiveness or a Zillow system error so that the agent didn't get the message. The review was rejected due to failure to comply with Community Guidelines (which one(s), I have no clue).
While I have no problem with Zillow gathering data on lack of response to electronic queries, I would find it much more valuable to separate those statistics from the reviews of people who actually worked with the agent.
Neither of them responded.
Last week I received a request from the Zillow automated system asking for a review of one of them. It wasn't obvious that there was an option for "did not respond to query" until digging deeply through the various options in the review. (And it was only with someone else's comment that made me realize that there may be such an option.)
Therefore, as I tend to test systems (being a skeptic from my little toe to the top of my head) I filled out the review and said that the agent didn't respond to my query and I could not evaluate whether this was an agent's lack of responsiveness or a Zillow system error so that the agent didn't get the message. The review was rejected due to failure to comply with Community Guidelines (which one(s), I have no clue).
While I have no problem with Zillow gathering data on lack of response to electronic queries, I would find it much more valuable to separate those statistics from the reviews of people who actually worked with the agent.
- J Philip Faranda, "jphilip"
- Contributions:90
Kristin,
I am the author of the referenced blog. I am a paying customer of Zillow. I certainly disagree with the policy for the reasons stated. This is not inconsistent with Zillow's own words. When Sara Bonert introduced the program a year ago, she said the following:
--------
It is a way for consumers to review real estate agents they've worked with in the past to assist other consumers in the agent selection process.
So, it is pretty clear that when rolled out, the program was for *client* reviews, not random inquiries.
If transparency is indeed the goal, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Zillow should not leave it to email or phone for agent responses to inquiries, and instead have a link on the email where the response can be made through the Zillow system so you can verify that a response was made or not. Trulia has such a system, as do others. That seems like the only fair thing to do if you insist on this policy.
While the agent who hung up twice on that person was wrong, things like that ought not set the tone for the rest of the industry. There are those of use who work hard, follow up on inquiries like they are dinner, and guard our good names with great effort. Granting random drive by inquiries the same power as clients to review is inconsistent, especially in the absence of a system response conduit.
I am the author of the referenced blog. I am a paying customer of Zillow. I certainly disagree with the policy for the reasons stated. This is not inconsistent with Zillow's own words. When Sara Bonert introduced the program a year ago, she said the following:
--------
It is a way for consumers to review real estate agents they've worked with in the past to assist other consumers in the agent selection process.
Who can review me?
- Any client, past or present, can review you regardless of when the transaction closed.
So, it is pretty clear that when rolled out, the program was for *client* reviews, not random inquiries.
If transparency is indeed the goal, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Zillow should not leave it to email or phone for agent responses to inquiries, and instead have a link on the email where the response can be made through the Zillow system so you can verify that a response was made or not. Trulia has such a system, as do others. That seems like the only fair thing to do if you insist on this policy.
While the agent who hung up twice on that person was wrong, things like that ought not set the tone for the rest of the industry. There are those of use who work hard, follow up on inquiries like they are dinner, and guard our good names with great effort. Granting random drive by inquiries the same power as clients to review is inconsistent, especially in the absence of a system response conduit.
- Dan, "the_country_hick"
- Contributions:4700
Philip, should I be able to review this agent or not on zillow?
www.zillow.com/advice-thread/Taking-a-listing-should-a-realtor-obtain-the-road-frontage-lot-size-and-dimensions-of-the-house/420889/#comment-response-1414450
"After saying they would call (or email) me back at least 2 weeks passed AND the listing was "updated" on realtor.com. That means it was not sold. The realtor appears to not be willing to get me basic information."
That was a month and a half ago. It was the listing agent who should be able to have the information available or at least get it from the sellers in a reasonable amount of time.
They had my phone number. They had my email address. They actually called me back one time. When I asked for specific details the contact ended.
I am not going to review that realtor here or elsewhere. I was iffy on the property anyway. I am not posting this to put them down. I am not even using their name or the state they are in. But SHOULD I be able to review them for dropping the ball so completely?
I did not buy from them but perhaps if they had gotten back to me I would have. Would this kind of review saying they never got me more detailed information be useful for other buyers or sellers?
www.zillow.com/advice-thread/Taking-a-listing-should-a-realtor-obtain-the-road-frontage-lot-size-and-dimensions-of-the-house/420889/#comment-response-1414450
"After saying they would call (or email) me back at least 2 weeks passed AND the listing was "updated" on realtor.com. That means it was not sold. The realtor appears to not be willing to get me basic information."
That was a month and a half ago. It was the listing agent who should be able to have the information available or at least get it from the sellers in a reasonable amount of time.
They had my phone number. They had my email address. They actually called me back one time. When I asked for specific details the contact ended.
I am not going to review that realtor here or elsewhere. I was iffy on the property anyway. I am not posting this to put them down. I am not even using their name or the state they are in. But SHOULD I be able to review them for dropping the ball so completely?
I did not buy from them but perhaps if they had gotten back to me I would have. Would this kind of review saying they never got me more detailed information be useful for other buyers or sellers?
- Loreena Yeo, "316teamREALTY"
- Contributions:67
I'm utterly surprised by the decision Zillow holds on reviews. While I understand the sentiment/ reason, it should not and cannot be lumped together.
I can also see how someone who is intentionally out there to hurt an agent can easily use this.
Like someone above suggested, if Zillow is truly concerned about response time, measure it. But it should not be lumped together with reviews - people who actually close out a transaction.
Have a Response Time indicator as a true measure. If I get 50 or 100 inquiries through Zillow, then one or two comes back negative, we have a predictor. If 25 comes back negative, we also know what to expect.
I'm not sure what was said in the review. But I can tell you this is also very subjective. How quick is quick? 24 hours? No - some consumers expect you to pick up your call immediately. Some expect it to be returned the same day. Some give you a 24 hour turnaround. This is so subjective, agents should never be penalized for it without further thought.
I can also see how someone who is intentionally out there to hurt an agent can easily use this.
Like someone above suggested, if Zillow is truly concerned about response time, measure it. But it should not be lumped together with reviews - people who actually close out a transaction.
Have a Response Time indicator as a true measure. If I get 50 or 100 inquiries through Zillow, then one or two comes back negative, we have a predictor. If 25 comes back negative, we also know what to expect.
I'm not sure what was said in the review. But I can tell you this is also very subjective. How quick is quick? 24 hours? No - some consumers expect you to pick up your call immediately. Some expect it to be returned the same day. Some give you a 24 hour turnaround. This is so subjective, agents should never be penalized for it without further thought.
- Sharon Lewis, "Sharon Lewis"
- Contributions:3923
With a little work you can tell whether they were 'real' reviews buy comparing names to public records around the same date and time.
- J Philip Faranda, "jphilip"
- Contributions:90
@Dan: It was a long thread and I didn't see who it was that invited your contact, but it seems to me that if they didn't follow up then their just reward would be losing your business.
@Sharon: Re-read the thread- this isn't about owners of record reviewing us, it is about anonymous inquiries who never hired us, met us it or worked with us having the same ability to rate us as past customers and clients.
I am all for transparency. I was the first Redfin partner agent in the state of New York. There is a difference, however, between transparency and leaving the window open.
@Sharon: Re-read the thread- this isn't about owners of record reviewing us, it is about anonymous inquiries who never hired us, met us it or worked with us having the same ability to rate us as past customers and clients.
I am all for transparency. I was the first Redfin partner agent in the state of New York. There is a difference, however, between transparency and leaving the window open.
- Christine Bohn, GRI - Realtor, "gainesvillehomes"
- Contributions:466
I use Zillow for my marketing plans. I remember Sara telling all of us Realtors about the testimonial program. I have been under the impression that we can only get recommendations from clients after "CLOSED" transactions. Historically, through the Zillow page, I must request these reviews from my clients via their email address.
Apparently now, that is not the case. So any Tom, Dick, Susie and Sally can just "visit" the Zillow page and make whatever comments they choose.
I find this disturbing.
Apparently now, that is not the case. So any Tom, Dick, Susie and Sally can just "visit" the Zillow page and make whatever comments they choose.
I find this disturbing.
- wetdawgs
- Contributions:26854
@Christine: The review system has never been for only closed transactions. If it were for closed transactions only, it would show even more severe bias than it does now. A person who'd listed their house with an agent for six months didn't sell it couldn't provide a review. A person who'd used a buyers agent for several months but didn't buy couldn't review.
Here are the FAQs on reviews.
Agent Reviews and ratings
Guidelines on Reviews
I agree that non-responsiveness to inquiries shouldn't be lumped with face to face interactions, but with personal experience of non-responsiveness by two agents (both with long strings of positive reviews) to a real inquiry - I was extremely surprised.
Here are the FAQs on reviews.
Agent Reviews and ratings
Guidelines on Reviews
I agree that non-responsiveness to inquiries shouldn't be lumped with face to face interactions, but with personal experience of non-responsiveness by two agents (both with long strings of positive reviews) to a real inquiry - I was extremely surprised.
Zillow Agent Reviews...A Request For Sanity
"A review was submitted for your Zillow profile indicating that you did not respond to the Reviewer's inquiry. Consumers who contact you through Zillow or otherwise have the opportunity to share their experience by submitting such a rating and review.
Since we realize that things outside your direct control could have contributed to this, and because we assume that you have every intention of following-up with leads, we are extending you a "Free Pass" and will not publish this review on your Zillow profile. Please note that this is a one-time courtesy and that you will not receive a "free pass" for similar reviews submitted for you in the future. We kindly ask that you follow-up with any and all leads that come your way, and that you ensure your Zillow profile is kept updated with your most current and reliable contact information."
From ActiveRain...Blog by
J Philip Faranda, Broker-Owner based in Briarcliff Manor, NY. LINK
Stating a discriminatory preference in an advertisement for housing is illegal. If you think this content is discriminatory or otherwise inappropriate and feel it should be removed from Zillow, please let us know by completing the information above.
We will review this content. Thanks for helping make the site more useful to everyone. To learn more, read Zillow's Good Neighbor Policy.