I’m the one waging the war, FYI.
I’m tired of my industry colleagues listing fictitious and/or invisible parking spaces on MLS in attempts to deliberately mislead the public, and fellow Realtors.
Let me go through examples of every way in which this is done…
I chose that photo above because it is a metaphor for how most Realtors think outside the box.
Many of my colleagues would consider this to be two parking spaces. Oh yeah – if they could get away with it – they would!
But that brings me to the crux of my frustration: I think that anybody can get away with anything!
Simply put, nobody seems to care when agents mislead the public (who doesn’t have the clear information that agents do on their internal MLS), or mislead the entire industry by listing “parking” when in fact there is none.
Here is my complete list of ways in which agents skirt around parking, some of which I may have talked about before. The list gets progressively worse as it goes along…
Rental
This is the classic case of “parking available.”
On the MLS system, we have the option of filtering out properties that don’t have parking. But sometimes, agents will include rental parking along with the listing and put “1” under the number of spaces.
See how this agent cleverly put “1#1” under the space number?
In my mind, this does not qualify as parking. If it did, then any property could be considered as having a parking space! You can always rent a space in the building – what a novel idea!
And sometimes when you call out an agent on this, they say, “There is parking! It’s a rental space! Duh!”
Parking Available For Purchase
This is another classic!
This happens with a lot of new developments where they advertise a unit for sale that has parking and locker – for $xxxx price.
So you think to yourself, “Oh wow, okay, so for $xxx we’re getting reasonable value. I see, I see…”
But as you scroll down and read the fine print, you see this:
This bothers me to no end.
If this unit – advertised at, say $599,000 does not have parking, then don’t list it with parking. If you say, “Parking available for an extra $37,500,” then the unit is really $636,500 and not $599,000.
It’s that “1” under “Parking” that bothers me. I’d have no problem with saying “Parking available for $35,000” in the MLS listing so long as this unit was NOT listed as having “1” parking space.
It’s blatant false advertising, in my opinion.
Something Called “Common” Parking?
This was a new one for me!
Last week, I was helping a friend with a lease for a Bay Street condominium and we were all set to sign on the dotted line.
We needed a condo with both parking and locker, which according to MLS, this unit had.
The parking space was called “common” on MLS, which I had never seen before for a condo. “Common” usually refers to a building where there is first come, first serve parking, ie. 20 spaces for the entire building, but no assigned or deeded spaces.
The MLS listing showed this:
So I called the listing agent and said, “I’m drawing up an offer – can you give me the legal description of the parking space.” He then told me that there was no parking with this unit.
I should have just assumed, but I try not to assume the worst.
I asked the agent, “So how come you have ‘one’ space listed on MLS? Where is this one space? It’s apparently ‘underground’ and it’s nice that it’s ‘private,’ but if you’re telling me that this condo doesn’t have parking then why the hell did you list a space on the MLS listing?”
Shocked, amazed, dumbfounded, insulted…
These are just a few of the words I can use to describe my reaction when he replied: “There is plenty of visitor parking available at the building. All they have to do is get a permit from the front desk.”
Huzzaah!
That’s a long term solution, eh? Simply park your car in visitors every single night for 365 straight days.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Park Down The Street
I’ve been working in Cabbagetown a fair bit lately, and I can’t believe what agents get away with!
One MLS listing showed “1” for parking spaces, and it said “mutual driveway.” Don’t forget – the descriptions for parking is different with houses and condos.
So I went to the property and of course, there was no parking space. But what was even more interesting was the fact that this house was a rowhouse and thus it had no driveway!
Once again, I asked the listing agent where this magical parking space was, and he said, “They rent from the owner across the street.”
Okay…
So, I asked “How come you have ‘mutual driveway’ listed on MLS?”
He responded, “Because the driveway belonging to the house across the street, where these owners rent, is a mutual drive!”
How do people get away with this?
If you list “188 Mabel Avenue” then how can you possibly describe the driveway at “185 Mabel Avenue” in the MLS listing?
As I said – nothing surprises me anymore.
Garage or Backyard: Take Your Pick
I’m sure the title gives this one away, but it happens all over the city.
I’ve seen this in Queen West, Little Italy, Bloor West Village, Cabbagetown, and Leslieville.
Basically anywhere you have a 100-foot lot and a laneway running behind the street, there is always potential for the owners to get sneaky.
Last week, I visited a house that claimed to have two car parking, and yet it had no front driveway, no mutual drive, and the owners themselves had no cars.
The house was gorgeous and clearly renovated from top to bottom, including a magnificent backyard with an interlocking stone patio. This backyard was one of the biggest selling features of the house, since it was lined on both sides with mature vines that covered the cedar lattice. I could easily see sitting on this patio every night in the summer!
I asked the listing agent what the two-car parking referred to, and he said, “Oh well they’ve converted their back parking pad into a patio. Yeah, as you can clearly see, there is room for two cars back there – right where the BBQ is on one side and where the waterfall/pond is on the other side.”
He went on to say that there was a laneway behind the street (which there was) and once upon a time, there was room for two cars to park. These owners, however, had no cars and built a back fence, and then spent about $50,000 on landscaping their back patio.
So this listing agent was suggesting that if you were so inclined, you could “easily” tear up the gorgeous backyard patio, remove the fence, and then park two cars only a few feet from your back door.
I suppose he has a point, but is it a logical, rational one?
In fact, are ANY of the above situations logical or rational?
There is misleading advertising in every industry, but I feel that in ours, we’re simply doing it to ourselves.
Anonymous
at 8:42 am
You know… it’s the same thing with bedrooms.
If I go on realtor.ca and filter “3 or more” bedrooms, I get the “2 + dens” too. And we all know what qualifies as a “den” these days…
jeff316
at 9:13 am
I don’t see much of a problem with the rental or backyard listings.
The mutual driveway across the street and the common parking are ridiculous, however.
I can see how listing a property where parking is available but not in the purchase price as “no parking” could be problematic for both agents and buyers; I’d be ticked if I missed out on a property I really liked because it was listed as ‘no parking’ when, in fact, parking was available, just at an extra cost.
Maybe the system needs another parking category – e.g. owned / available (not owned) / none.
Joe Q.
at 9:46 am
David, is there any legal or regulatory recourse against agents who make these kinds of misrepresentations on MLS listings?
Geoff
at 10:19 am
@ Joe Q – typically listings say something like “provider not responsible for errors in listing.” Usually only the agreement of purchase and sale is the key legal doc, but many lawyers also recommend a survey be available too (at least for houses, anyway).
Joe Q.
at 11:07 am
@ Geoff — so even if the listing contains deliberately misleading statements, as in David’s examples (i.e. not just honest mistakes) there is nothing that can be done? (I’m not necessarily talking about compensation for a financial loss, but about some kind of censure from the RE board.)
David Fleming
at 11:26 am
I’d love to comment on the ability/inability of TREB to oversee things like this, but I don’t think it would be prudent…
jeff316
at 1:56 pm
@Anonymous – agreed on the 3 beds issue. There’s totally a difference between a house with an additional bedroom in the basement or a condo with a corner…i mean, a den. 😉
Pen
at 3:53 pm
Hi David, I can understand your frustration with inaccurate listings or listings with embellishments. Whatever your opinion regarding TREB’s “ability/inability to oversee things like this” I encourage you to report any purposefully made inaccurate representations or any infractions of TREB’s MLS rules and regulations to data integrity service and provide whatever support you can to verify your complaint.
While TREB is not responsible for the accuracy of any listing, the listing brokerage is. Complaints are researched for validity and forwarded to professional standards where warranted.
Where many of these listing REALTORS may think they have made an acccurate representation, they will come to learn otherwise.
You will not learn of the outcome, but that is not to presume there hasn’t been one for the REALTOR and/or their brokerage.
Only by action can we better this profession.
Sarah
at 2:04 am
As someone who long figured there was a proud tradition of obfuscation and equivocation in real estate and rental ads, I would appreciate all efforts to report these inaccuracies. There’s embellishment and clever photo angles and then there’s outright lying.
I’ve seen those 2’x4′ “dens” (literally) and “one bedroom” units that are really studios in which the kitchen is “separated” using a pillar and a half wall – not sure how a kitchen qualifies as a bedroom. And don’t even get me started on the phrase “minutes to subway.”
This sort of thing has been going on for so long that humour books have been written interpreting what is really meant by real estate ads.
I know we live in a “buyer beware” world but considering that one’s dwelling is probably the largest and most important single purchase the average person makes, any attempts to clean up the listings would sure make it easier for us.
And I never believe an ad without dimensions listed.
Richard
at 5:38 am
@jeff316
“I’d be ticked if I missed out on a property I really liked because it was listed as ‘no parking’ when, in fact, parking was available, just at an extra cost.”
No! No! No! No! No! No! No!
If I’ve budgeted for $X, I do NOT want to pay extra for parking. Not everybody has money they can throw out at a whim. If you’re rich, congrats, but you are in a small minority.
Richard
at 5:48 am
David, you are absolutely right. Misleading. Dishonest. Unscrupulous. All those examples are outrageous.
I’d be really pissed at the listing agent. If I need a parking spot, and I have a budget, I do NOT want to spend extra to rent or purchase. Just show me properties that include parking in the price. Thank you very much for wasting my f*cking time! How inconsiderate.
Do these listing agents really think I’ll have an Alzheimer’s moment and fork out extra cash to buy or rent parking? How retarded are they??
thecondofitz
at 10:36 am
@ anonymous I know exactly what you mean in regards to the +den in listings. Have a look at the “study” in the floor plan linked below. I had a big argument with my client over not listing this unit as a 1+1…
@ David A post on ridiculous floor plans might be a good idea.
http://i.imgur.com/77woY.jpg
jeff316
at 12:02 pm
@Richard
“No! No! No! No! No! No! No! If Iâ??ve budgeted for $X, I do NOT want to pay extra for parking. Not everybody has money they can throw out at a whim. If youâ??re rich, congrats, but you are in a small minority.”
Yeah and that’s fine, but that has nothing to do with the root problem here, which is the complete reliance on the MLS system means that listings that don’t fit the precise MLS listing mold fail to sell.
If you set your MLS search to spit back results under 350$k that include parking, if you get one David’s examples above (some of which are legit, some of which clearly aren’t), admitedly it is frustrating but you can always ignore it.
But a listing at 325$k where the parking is another 25$k or whatever$ month? On those same search parameters, however, you’ll never see it despite being well within your budget.
The MLS system wasn’t set up to do our budgeting. It was set up to return results for realtors (and in turn, clients.) And in terms of parking, just like the plus-bed den issue, it’s not doing the best possible job – for those on a tight budget, or the “rich”.
A binary y/n for parking just doesn’t accurately reflect the diversity of real estate listings, nor the needs of clients.
jeff316
at 12:46 pm
Oops, correction:
“But a listing at 325$k where the parking is another 25$k or whatever$ month? On those same search parameters, however, *if that’s a ‘no parking’ listing* youâ??ll never see it despite being well within your budget.
Krupo
at 9:07 pm
@Pen, excellent suggestion, but he’d have to hire a full-time assistant to chase after every 3rd listing to have them corrected!
I agree though that the MLS system doesn’t make it easy for brokers who aren’t so much trying to game the system, but not get punished by its binary nature. If only there was real power or force to have the system improved!