DISQUS

Great job with your support for Vlad! I just found your two articles and added them to an action plan I wrote that links to the latest articles regarding Vlad.....

Let's be honest here though, the people that are aggressive enough to sue a blogger based on frivolous claims don't care whether you have a disclaimer or not. Also, simply putting a disclaimer or statement that "this is opinion" or similar is not going to protect you if you are in the wrong.... just want to throw that out there....

If somebody thinks they have grounds to go after you, they will not think twice about going after you, they are going after you because they think they have legitimate cause.... or because they simply want to harass you..... cases are judged based on cause in fact, not level of disclosure...... so just don't let disclosure afford you a false sense of protection......if I'm off base, set me straight Joe......

I hear you loud and clear on that Joe. I have a friend that was recently involved in a small class action suit.... there were a handful of folks involved, not a lot. As the defendant tried to settle, some of the folks in the class were agitated and uncomfortable with even the thought of litigation.... many wanted to jump at a $50k settlement per plaintiff.... needless to say, the group held out and ended up settling for low seven figures per plaintiff.... even that was after one plaintiff jumped the gun in mediation and waivered against the wishes of the other class members and their council... but once they had signaled an OK to the mediator, they were done....

The point is, you are right, publishing a C & D if you can't stand the heat isn't a good idea..... and may not be a good idea, period.... but hey, that's never stopped me from doing anything before! :)

Joe:

Very smart advice. I take a slightly different view on C & D letters....

I don't like bullies. I do like embarrassing bullies by publishing their C & D's or related threats..... It may not be the most efficient or even smart move, but I would like to think that I'm making that bully think twice about harrassing somebody next time because they know their ridiculous demands may be spread around the internet.... or worse will show up when their company or name is googled.....

A special message for you Joe!: http://brokerscience.com/wp-content/uploads/200...

In case there were any rumors floating around out there.... I will NOT be heading the how not to get sued panel with Joe..... :)

Andy: I saw that you stumbled us... much appreciated. I have put days and days and days (yes days) into researching and writing about the facts regarding ePerks to try to get as much coverage regarding Vlad's case as possible..... while virtually guaranteeing that we will be sued as was confirmed by ePerks CEO's comments in the Inman piece that came out today. I've been in contact with Vlad on a daily basis and it became clear to me early on that simply bringing out the facts would be the best way to help.......Again, I truly appreciate your help.

Andy: I just posted voice mails from ePerks CEO Ben Behrouzi threatening to black ball and sue a former employee.... the same tactics used on Vlad and myself.... I haven't DUGG, stumbled, or submitted anywhere.... if you have any advice on the best way to get traction on putting more pressure on Ben and ePerks to help Vlad with his case... let me know....

Site looks great!!!! one suggestion: DITCH the flash intro..... if you need a video intro, put it on home page somewhere and allow users opt to play it.........

Great point. I've taken your advice, my sidebar now reads FREE News Updates as opposed to Subscribe via: ..... big difference.... speaking of RSS Icons, I've created some free real estate ones, my name links to them....

Great stuff, great coverage. More targeted platforms are just what the doctor ordered.

That's amazing, 300K before launching.... unfortunately they want me to submit 5 of my contacts before they will let me see 1 of their 300k.

I was one step away from including this element in my Evolution of Mortgage Lead piece this morning http://tinyurl.com/4zvsvk .... but held off .... I covered a very similar issue in regards to google search for real estate .... http://tinyurl.com/4besfs ......... Google is a game changer in either of these verticals when they choose to be but I think their core focus is currently on scaling internationally and other larger products..... if I'm wrong and they decide to focus on these verticals, it is theirs for the taking....

I just wrote about this .... the interesting part is that it looks like Eperks might be abandoned (based on traffic death spiral) as Ben moves to his new startup, Ihype.com that launches in a few days.... my name has a link to the article .....

Thanks Rick, I've included the doc here: http://brokerscience.com/hvcc/tavma-weighs-in-o...

I have updated the thread to show the Alamode petition and Dave Bigger's email regarding overwhelming Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's servers.....

Even with apparently large numbers of the industry speaking up, I'm still not even seeing any coverage of this in the news or in the blogosphere.... amazing....it's like it doesn't exist, I'm thankful that Alamode has stepped up big time. Cheers to them.

Most appraisers I've spoken with have no clue this exists...... the very appraisers that will give 40% or more of their income to unregulated AMC's have no clue that their profession may change drastically forever..... The key is that since this is an settlement it has received little to no coverage since it is is not a bill working its way through Congress....otherwise, I think there would be a much more vocal voice opposing the bad parts of this measure.

Regardless of appraisers, brokers, or agents, where are the consumer advocates? You have to pay for a new $300 to $500 appraisal if your broker isn't living up to your expectations? Are you KIDDING ME? If your circumstances change and you need to change lenders for a different program, you have to buy a new appraisal?! Not only the cost that is involved, but the time is important as well.... many consumers have to take time off of work to meet the appraiser and doing anything twice without good reason makes no sense.

HOW MANY CONSUMERS WILL STAY IN A PROGRAM OR LOAN THEY DON'T WANT FOR FEAR OF BEING STUCK WITH THEIR LENDER BECAUSE THEY DON'T WANT TO CHANGE LENDERS OR PAY FOR ANOTHER APPRAISAL AND EXTEND THE TIME INVOLVED IN THE LOAN PROCESS? Why the shift in leverage towards mortgage companies / lenders? What type of consumer oriented "code" does such a thing?

Todd you totally crack me up with your KOS comment.... that is too funny....

Whether or not people are good or bad isn't the right question to ask.

The correct question: When making financial decisions of a highly sensitive nature, do you feel secure using data that is submitted by 100% anonymous users that may have financial incentive for submitting false information?

The answer is obvious and is why there is NO CREDIBLE ARGUMENT against putting reasonable measures in place to protect your users. That is what I'm hearing here.... excuses and more excuses for not taking the measures necessary to protect consumers.

If people didn't game systems for financial gain, we wouldn't have spam..... email spam, link spam, contact form spam, trackback spam, comment spam, etc......Still sticking with the people are good argument? Furthermore, this is the internet, it only takes one bad apple and that should be enough to assure you take all means necessary to protect your users.

There is no system in existence that can both provide 100% user anonymity and provide usable user feedback data in this context, it doesn't exist.

@DavidG: Are you kidding me? Re-read post 25 or google 11.5 reasons zillow will not work in its current form..... Again, if you understood mortgage origination and the finer points of giving a mortgage rate quote, you would understand my assessment, regardless of whether or not you agreed with it.

"People are not evil"

Let me get this staight, Is it Zillow's position that security measures to protect and validate user data are not necessary because Zillow's model is dependent on the kindness of humanity?

I cannot believe the words I'm reading and I cannot believe that Zillow allows somebody to roam the internet conveying such messages as a representative of their company.... I'm in shock.

I have a prediction: We will be hearing a lot less from DavidG in the future.

@DavidG: you are correct, you are not able to keep up with this thead.

“Inaccurate borrower information means inaccurate quotes.” REFERS TO: Zillow's inability to collect accurate information, not consumers' ability or willingness to give accurate information....

"Lastly, I also feel I need to point out that not all people are evil. The fact is that MOST people are honest and abuse is rare. I really abhor the line of critique that argues against transparency on the grounds that people are liars or idiots - in my experience, that’s just not true."

@DavidG: You are point blank clueless and the intertubes are going to eat you alive. If we were on a more tech oriented forum such as TechCrunch right now you would point blank be laughed out of the room by people that build communities on a regular basis and know better from experience. People would be hurling insults and mocking you based on the stupidity of your statement. Just because you are silly enough to believe such a statement doesn't mean you should expose your users to such a system to test your hypotheses. You would be taken to task for your statement as you should be. You have just shown your hand and it isn't pretty.

@Todd: Then our definition of quality is different. I cannot give you an accurate quote without knowing if there are any thirty day lates, consumer credit counselling, charge offs, other derogatory credit items, length of employment, or without having reasonably accurate credit score or home value..... that's just me though. There are also a million other scenarios that can come up with title, value, and the like that you will not here about until you talk to the borrower. They happen day in and day out.... all the time.... how many cookie cutter open / shut deal do you get? The majority of mine over my entire career are not cookie cutter.....Brokers have to get the story from borrowers in order to get the full picture and quote correctly....sometimes this can be done with limited information, but only when people have great scores, perfect credit, perfect values, perfect employment, etc..... I'm not saying it can't be done, I'm saying is shouldn't be done, not the way Zillow is doing it.....

At the end of the day, the rating system is the secondary issue by far. The bottom line is that no lender can give an accurate quote with insufficient / inaccurate data. This means that the Zillow mortgage marketplace will HURT consumers...... there is no other way to say it.

@David: you fail time after time to address the core issue regarding ratings: YOUR RATING SYSTEM CAN, WILL, AND IS BEING GAMED.

When you go to choose a money manager that is going to handle and invest your life savings, would you rather choose money managers based on a rating system that anybody can 100% anonymously post ratings to or one that is screened, monitored, and has information verification in place? Why is it that you would prefer a system that you know has checks and balances and is monitored? Because you know that without checks and balances accuracy is suspect........ Yet, this is exactly what you are asking your users to do. Again this is secondary though....

If web 2.0 has taught us anything it is that user participation / user generated content only has value when it is utilized in a manner that has checks and balances in place to stop abuse and spam, yet Zillow clearly doesn't get this.

@Diane: It is not OK to give people quotes based on bad information, ever. The Zillow information gathering is inherently flawed and does not collect the necessary information to give an accurate quote. Misleading consumers like this can't be justified with "some people are never happy". It is wrong.

Compare the Zillow model with the traditional model where brokers speak with the consumer and gather the necessary information and THEN give a quote....

@DavidG: You seem to misunderstand how giving quotes to consumers works in the real world. I can't blame you completely for this ignorance though because chances are you have never originated a single loan in your life, am I correct?

The ebay comparision is not apples to apples, if you understood that mortgage quotes often cover the purchase of a home, the biggest financial transaction most people will ever make, you would not compare it to an ebay transaction. Unlike Zillow, on Ebay, any anonymous person cannot go and start giving reviews, there is a review process in place to set up an account and user’s actions are documented, so if abuse occurs, it can be taken care of. There is also accountability so if somebody gives undeserved feedback, it will likely be returned in spades. Both parties have a stake in providing accurate rating, both parties feel the effects of the rating system, and both parties must participate in a transaction before giving ratings. On the other hand, there is nothing stopping me from going on Zillow right now and giving bad and good reviews at will as I choose.

This begs the question, why does Ebay provide a reliable and validated reputation system when I buy an item for 99 cents, yet Zillow does not for a $500,000 mortgage transaction quote?

One of the biggest challenges for web 2.0 companies is managing abuse and spam so I’m surprised Zillow has launched a system that has no system in place to prevent this when the results and abuse are inevitable. Building a system that is so easily gamed hurts consumers who will trust the “ratings” they see. I see this a blissful ignorance by Zillow at best and willful negligence at worst.

If you give a consumer the best service in the world and in the end their quote turns out to be inaccurate as I have pointed out is very likely at Zillow.com, then that consumer will be understandably upset when their rate, payments, and possibly ability to qualify are changed. They will grade you on your inability to provide your promised quote, not on the manner in which you delivered this quote, the vast majority of the time. This is how it works in the real world, just wanted to give you a friendly heads up. That’s right when you tell somebody you can give them something at one price and then you later change your story and tell the that the price is going up, it doesn’t make them happy…. I know shocking. Sometimes this occurs naturally in business, but Zillow is just really good at making this scenario a reality by taking the human information gathering component out, ultimately hurting both the lender and consumer.

Guys, if reviews are based on anonymous users then they hold absolutely no value. In fact they very quickly become the tool of less desirable lenders looking to stifle competition.

I'm definitely not against Zillow in any way, shape or form. I've merely provided my argument that the consumer will receive inaccurate quotes.... the second part of my argument is about their business model and how it will HAVE to change if it is successful.....Any one of my first four points can easily create an inaccurate quote that produces a very unsatisfied / irate borrower.

On a side note, I don't think brokeroutpost is a measure of anything..... if you had 25k posts and didn't produce, you wouldn't like anything either! If you readjust your chart now there are more people for then against.....