Smile! You're on Candid Camera! (or 'Filming Buyers in your Home')

Your buyer can't lose negotiating power that they never had. You said "The fact that the property had been vacant for quite some time gave an illusion of privacy," and  "I wonder how many times it has cost them a sale," which in my experience means a seller who has overpriced the property and is unwilling to negotiate what a ready willing and able buyer is going to pay.

One of the biggest reasons people use my services as a Realtor is to keep emotions out of the negotiations. I help them do that by not relaying every unkind thing the other side says to me. If it is contractual, then I clean it up as best I can and present the information in a professional way. I leave all of the garbage, emotions and personal attacks out. Years in this business will tell you which is which.

I have fought many agents for the return of my clients earnest money deposit or the refrigerator that was supposed to stay, or the last minute repair to be made before closing. However, I try my best to manage the emotions out of it. If these were my buyers I would make them feel better about the things they said while in the house (which is the issue) by reminding them of the wonderful compliments they paid to things and laughing about the criticisms by saying something like, "If they didn’t want to hear, then they shouldn’t have been listening."

Negotiating power is as strong as you make it. So what if the listing agent and sellers know that your clients said that they would pay twice as much for the house as what they’re asking? When it comes down to it, you must now make the seller and seller's agent understand that after thinking it over and discussing the many problems, they are now willing to offer less than list price.

Legal action can be the only way sometimes, but my clients and I have better things to do than sit in a court room, so I will do everything I can to keep us both out.   

Peter & Tammy Gibaud

This is something that always makes me nervous when showing homes.  You never know who is watching.  I never discuss too many details while in a home during a showing because of this.  

If the sellers had stickers or signs notifying potential buyers of closed circuit recording I think the sellers are probably in the clear.  Our office has a sign on the door that everyone who enters our lobby is being recorded.  We use it as a security measure to see who people come and go with.  

I get it that there are more and more people trying to protect their properties with more and more cameras and security.  If the seller tells each agent up front that everyone will be monitored and recorded, then the buyers can make their own decision about this up front.  If they are recording everyone without their knowledge, even after making a legitimate showing appointment, I wonder if it moves into a legal category, and I for one would be very hesitant to negotiate any sort of deal with people like this.

Mimi, whether the agent should have disclosed this is more likely a legal matter as to whether there is a law dictating disclosure in a private residence. The real question is "Did the agent violate the law?"

I tell my buyers that with the technology today, there is always a chance that the sellers are listening in, or watching.  Nanny cams, security systems, baby monitors, whatever.

So, I tell them to NOT say anything they do not wish for the seller to hear.  Then, wait until we step outside.

My first reaction is that the sellers should give notice of monitoring.  However, I'm not sure about the laws in Colorado...at any rate, the fact that the negoations were recorded doesn't bode well. 

I think Michael #60 is right - "Did the agent, or sellers, violate the law?" 

Happy St. Patrick's Day to you Meems.

I was contracted to perform a home inspection by a young woman who was purchasing a home that was a FSBO, it was a relatively large, expensive home. When I arrived at the home I met my client and was informed, as is typical with a FSBO, the owner would be present in the home during the inspection but would be in his office. As I went through the home with my client I would explain the issues I found. The house had some signficant issues, the owner had done a lot of work himself so there was a considerable amount of unsafe electric work, plumbing work etc. About half way through the inspection the owner shows up as I was explaining to my client how the gas hot water heater in the bedroom closet wasn't safe. The owner storms into the bedroom and starts screaming at me how I'm trying to kill his deal and how I better get the heck out of his house immediately or he's calling the cops on me, all with his finger two inches from my nose,  he turns to my client and starts screaming at her that she better not listen to me. So I collect my stuff and head outside, my client apologizes and pays me in full. It turned out that the owner had  his intercom on in his office and was able to listen to me talk to my client the whole time. Ever since I always pay attention to those intercoms if the owners are present. On another note, a recent story in the news in my area, a nanny camera caught a realtor previewing a home just before the clients showed up pilfering some of the home owners possesions, needless to say the realtor is now in some hot water.

I give a lack of privacy example that is as bad, I had a seller that would hide in a hall closet so she could hear what people were saying about the house. I found this out when she informed me how unhappy she was at the comments a prospective buyer made. I did inform her that if she did this again I would have to withdraw from the listing. 

In looking at it I would just consider it "giving feed back" . . . don't listing agents crave "feed back" so they can tell their clients what the buyers thought of the place, who it was priced, what they thought about condition, etc.?  Well, there you go . . . feed back.

I think most here are missing the most important part of their statement.

and informed me that "the Sellers even turn it on when there is a scheduled showing."

If the system was on and monitoring all the time, then I would agree with the "oh well" sentiment others have here, but that statement clearly shows the owners were attempting to eaves drop and monitor prospective buyers and give themselves an unfair advantage.

I would not deal with them or their agent on this property and make sure to let evey other agent I know about this situation, agent and property. 

This does seem to give an advantage to the Sellers, but since it is their home, I wonder should prospective buyers have an expectation of privacy in the home of the Seller? For sure this gives me another issue to counsel buyers on how and where to comment on homes being viewed?

This is a tough one as people have nanny cams and security cameras in homes nowadays. When you discuss the home and even what your client would offer and ultimately pay you lost all negotiation. It's easy to think your alone in a vacant home but it's not always the case.

Meems~obviouslythis isn't the kind of seller one would want to work with when, from the outset, they are distrusting, dishonest and asking their agent to be the same way. Glad these buyers went elsewhere.

Happy E to you, too!

OK, I'm a little slow getting to the party on this one.  What a bizarre event.  I'd be pretty ticked to find out I was being monitored by the sellers.  It seems terribly unethical, but worse yet, it gave them an adantage in negotiations that was terribly unfair.  On the flip side, they could see you dancing on their furniture too.  8-)

Mimi~ Our business is all about disclosure. The agent should have shared that the cameras would be on during the showing. Now they have the upper hand in the negotiations. Not cool at all!