{"id":289,"date":"2017-05-26T12:33:09","date_gmt":"2017-05-26T16:33:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/?p=289"},"modified":"2017-05-26T12:33:09","modified_gmt":"2017-05-26T16:33:09","slug":"the-right-to-seclusion-of-personal-facts-vs-public-opinon","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/?p=289","title":{"rendered":"The Right to Seclusion of Personal Facts vs. Public Opinon"},"content":{"rendered":"

Unhappy with the valuation determination by Zillow’s Zestimates a builder and related parties have initiated a\u00a0class action suit <\/a>against Zillow Inc. and Zillow Group, for class action complaint for (a) violation of the Illinois Real Estate Appraiser\u2019s Licensing Act, (b) the tort of invasion of seclusion; (c) violation of the Uniform Deceptive Trade Business Practices Act and (d) for violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act.<\/p>\n

The plaintiffs don’t like Zillow sharing its opion on the value of their properties, and want the courts to stop Zillow from sharing that opinion. Plaintiffs allege that Zillow is somehow invading their “seclusion,”\u00a0but of course planitiffs don’t have to look at the Zestimates.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Zillow is not publishing private facts about plaintiffs, but rather Zillow’s opinion, based upon public information. \u00a0Does anyone have the right to stop another from forming an opinion, or expressing that opinion? \u00a0In the\u00a01-5 star, thumbs up\/thumbs down, swipe left\/swipe right world in which we live, opinions are constantly being formed and expressed, \u00a0a person is entitled to secure in personal\u00a0facts from prying eyes, but a Zestimate is not a personal fact of the property owner, it is a third party opinion the property owner does not own or control.<\/p>\n

Plaintiff sets forth is claim as follows:<\/p>\n

29. \u00a0Notwithstanding the above standards and laws, Zillow nevertheless unilaterally and willfully opted to disregard Plaintiffs\u2019 and the Class\u2019 right to seclusion by publicly disseminating appraisal\/financial opinions relative to real property for the general public for review.<\/p>\n

30. Here, at all times relevant, Illinois has recognized the tort of invasion of seclusion. Specifically, Illinois prohibits \u201c[o]ne who intentionally intrudes, physically or otherwise, upon the solitude or seclusion of another or his private affairs or concerns, is subject to liability to the other for invasion of his privacy, if the intrusion would be highly offensive to a reasonable person.\u201d Restatement (Second) of Torts \u00a7 652B (1977). Moreover, comment b to section 652B of the Restatement provides, in pertinent part: \u201cb. The invasion may be * * * by some other form of investigation or examination into his private concerns, as by opening his private and personal mail, searching his safe or his wallet, examining his private bank account, or compelling him by a forged court order to permit an inspection of his personal documents. The intrusion itself makes the defendant subject to liability, even though there is no publication or other use of any kind of the * * * information outlined.\u201d Restatement (Second) of Torts \u00a7 652B cmt. b, at 378\u201379 (1977).<\/p>\n

31. \u00a0Zillow violated the Plaintiffs\u2019 and the Class\u2019 right to seclusion by: (a) intentionally gathering financial information relative to their real estate asset\u2019s value without the express and advance consent of Plaintiffs and the Class; (b) by intentionally compiling that information so as to create a computer valuation tool (i.e. the \u201cZestimate\u201d) in an effort to provide appraisal valuations relative to Plaintiffs\u2019 and the Class\u2019 property without the express and advance consent of Plaintiffs and the Class; (c) by intentionally and publicly disseminating the financial\/appraisal information generated by the \u201cZestimate\u201d tool relative to Plaintiffs\u2019 and the Class\u2019 real property on the internet for third parties to see without giving Plaintiffs and the Class the right to advance notice; and (d) by refusing to allow Plaintiffs and the Class the right to opt out of the public dissemination of the listing of their property and\/or their financial\/appraisal conclusions relative to same.<\/p>\n

32. Because Zillow has improperly invaded the seclusion of Plaintiffs and the Class and shows no sign of ceasing their conduct, injunctive relief is necessary and proper.<\/p>\n

33. Moreover, Zillow\u2019s improper invasion of seclusion also creates an actual damages claim by Plaintiffs and the Class. For example, the improper \u201cZestimate\u201d tool and its invasion on the seclusion of Plaintiffs\u2019 and the Class\u2019 appraisal\/financial information has proximately caused the following injury: (a) a low \u201cZestimate\u201d driving away potential buyers; (b) a low \u201cZestimate\u201d causing buyers to harass sellers with the admittedly incorrect information that not be published; (c) a low \u201cZestimate\u201d adding unnecessary expense relative to the sales process, including but not limited to paying bills\/mortgages\/taxes relative to the real property due to the increased time taken to sell the property; (d) in some cases, a low \u201cZestimate\u201d forcing many sellers to hire brokers because of the confusion created by Zillow (therein adding additional and otherwise unnecessary expense to the sale of the property); and (e) in some cases, a low \u201cZestimate\u201d causing property owners to withdraw their selling for sale altogether due to their inability to sell the property.<\/p>\n

34. Further, upon information and belief, Zillow has publicly admitted that the \u201cZestimate\u201d tool is flawed and confusing. Likewise, upon information and belief, Zillow has never taken the position that its valuation techniques have any similarity and\/or foundation to the nationally recognized USPAP quality valuation standards.<\/p>\n

35. Indeed, upon information and belief, Zillow has bragged that the confusion created via their admittedly flawed \u201cZestimate\u201d tool creates marketing opportunities for \u201cpremier agents\u201d of Zillow, i.e. real estate brokers who pay Zillow for seller leads. Specifically, Spencer Rascoof (the CEO of Zillow Group) has publically bragged on Twitter that the “Questions about the Zestimate are an opportunity [for real estate brokers who pay Zillow for seller leads] to get the appointment.”\u00a0 A copy of the \u201ctweet\u201d is attached hereto as Exhibit 7 and is incorporated herein by reference.\u00a0 In other words, Zillow has affirmatively and publicly embraced the fact that the confusing and inaccurate \u201cZestimate\u201d tool is nothing more than an improper marketing ploy for Zillow\u2019s premier agents to use in further invading the Plaintiffs\u2019 and the Class\u2019 right to seclusion.<\/p>\n

36. Upon information and belief, Zillow does not allow any mechanism for Plaintiffs and\/or the Class to cure and\/or demand removal of their listing and\/or the \u201cZestimate\u201d. Rather, Plaintiffs and the Class are directed to go on a \u201cwild goose chase\u201d by sending e-mails to an unresponsive and unqualified employee wherein the \u201cZestimate\u201d rarely (if ever) is removed and\/or cured by Zillow.\u00a0 Upon information and belief, Zillow\u2019s refusal to resolve the confusion created by the \u201cZestimate\u201d is purposeful in that Zillow has come to realize that their refusal to cure the \u201cZestimate\u201d problem that they created will pressure the Plaintiffs and the Class to retain one of Zillow\u2019s \u201cpremier\u201d real estate brokers to resolve valuation issues and help them market the property.<\/p>\n

37. For example, Zillow has publicly admitted that their \u201cpremier\u201d real estate broker should therein use the flawed \u201cZestimate\u201d as a way to establish a client\/broker relationship with the confused Plaintiffs and Class: \u201canytime that someone [a property owner]\u2026 contacts you [the real broker relative to the \u201cZestimate\u201d]\u2026.you have a live person on the other end of the phone that is interested in real estate\u2026.that\u2019s not just a lead, that\u2019s a smoking hot lead\u2026and that\u2019s where explaining how the \u201cZestimate\u201d is calculated and what its strength and weaknesses are helps prove that value add [by you the real estate broker] to your client [the property owner]. I\u2019ve had people come up to me at conferences basically saying \u2018Please don\u2019t make this \u201cZestimate\u201d any more accurate.\u00a0 I love it– because its an angle\u2014it\u2019s a way to start and establish a conversation, build that trust\u2026\u2019 all of those kinda fundamental steps you need to make and take when you first have a contact that you\u2019re hopefully ultimately convert into a client.\u201d\u00a0 (Source YouTube: \u201cZillow Myth: The Zestimate Makes My Job Difficult\u201d:\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?list=PLuETP0dUuSkddPEb5uMh_uwvchL5P4do6&params=OAFIAVgX&v=kaNxLGB0ePE&mode=NORMAL&app=desktop) In sum, Zillow has publicly and effectively admitted that the \u201cZestimate\u201d is a deceptive marketing ploy that Zillow\u2019s real estate brokers can use to secure sell-side brokerage contracts with residential real property owners.<\/p>\n

38. In other words, Zillow has publicly admitted that not only was their invasion upon Plaintiffs\u2019 and the Class\u2019 seclusion intentional, but that their \u201cZestimate\u201d tool should be used to prey upon the Plaintiffs and the Class so as to force them to retain real estate brokers. As such, Plaintiffs and the Class request punitive damages in addition to the above forms of relief.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Unhappy with the valuation determination by Zillow’s Zestimates a builder and related parties have initiated a\u00a0class action suit against Zillow Inc. and Zillow Group, for class action complaint for (a) violation of the Illinois Real Estate Appraiser\u2019s Licensing Act, (b) … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[20,21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-289","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-right-of-privacy","category-seclusion"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=289"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":292,"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/289\/revisions\/292"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=289"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=289"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ipmanagement.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=289"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}