In the world of Judge Judy, used car salespeople and real estate agents don’t have the best reputation. According to Judge Judy, honesty and customer care are not part of their job descriptions. However, there are real estate salespeople who go above and beyond to address serious problems and resolve legitimate concerns.
One such story begins with an urgent email from a man named Thomas. He and his elderly mother, Anabel, have been renting a lovely little house for several years. Recently, the house was listed for sale with a large real estate company. A photographer was scheduled to come and take photos of the inside and outside of the house to be posted online.
When the photographer arrived, Thomas and his mother asked him not to include their family photographs or anything that could expose their personal lives to strangers. The photographer assured them that he could blur out those items and proceeded to take the photos. However, when Anabel checked the real estate company’s website a few days later, she discovered that none of the requested blurring had been done. Their family photos, the contents of the house, and even Thomas’ car license plate were clearly visible on real estate websites all over the internet.
Feeling their privacy had been invaded, Thomas reached out for help. He contacted Dennis Beaver, a lawyer who often writes about legal matters. Dennis explains that photographs are a crucial part of real estate sales, with sellers and agents wanting maximum exposure for the property. However, there are cases where sellers can specify that certain items should be blurred out to protect privacy. This is something that needs to be discussed with the listing agent or broker.
Dennis emphasizes the importance of obtaining the tenant’s consent before taking and using photographs of an occupied rental unit. Photos revealing personal details or easy access points can pose risks to tenants’ safety and privacy.
In the case of Thomas and Anabel, their request for blurring wasn’t respected, and their privacy was compromised. Dennis advises that if this happens, a suit for invasion of privacy could be filed in most states. However, he suggests taking immediate action to have the photos taken offline. Contacting the company’s media relations people can often yield positive results.
In Thomas and Anabel’s situation, Dennis took matters into his own hands. He reached out to a broker in their area, explaining the problem, and received the necessary information to contact the relevant parties. The real estate agents involved were not only helpful but also appreciative of Dennis’ intervention. They understood the potential consequences of their photographer’s mistake and acted quickly to resolve the issue. In less than 24 hours, the photos were taken down, and Thomas and Anabel’s privacy restored.
This story serves as a reminder that not all real estate agents are dismissive of their clients’ concerns. There are professionals who prioritize integrity and customer satisfaction. While Judge Judy may have her opinions, it’s essential to acknowledge the real estate salespeople who take their responsibilities seriously and work diligently to address problems that arise.
In conclusion, it’s important to recognize that, like any profession, there are individuals who don’t meet the highest standards. However, this shouldn’t overshadow the efforts of those who go above and beyond to serve their clients. Thomas and Anabel’s story is a perfect example of real estate agents who acted quickly and responsibly in resolving a serious issue. Their actions should be commended, and it serves as a lesson to everyone involved in the real estate industry.