Not sure what your question is, but the only thing that matters is the ROI, right?

What's ugly to someone is lovely to someone else. When I first saw La Sagrada Familia, I thought "that is one butt ugly church" - but it's considered a beautiful structure that deserves its fame and glory by other people.

I was in awe the first time I saw it. And that's only in pictures. (Lot of dusting needed to keep the interior clean though.)

Their house is a museum
When people come to see 'em
They really are a scream
The Addams Family

Looks like a builder's adaptation of a Parisian wannabe mansard that fell off the truck on its way to San Francisco. I bet someone with the right attitude and skill set could transform it.

Tasteful Home | Gladywne · More Info

With some work it could look like a modern Italian villa. I like it.

On the very rare occasions when we re-possess, we can't undertake renovations, only clean and repair. My prayer is that we never have to set foot on a property! (Sort of like architects.)

Wow! This house is so ugly it warrants a photo and post on Houzz? First, someone owns this house so posting a picture online without their permission is, IMO, bad form. Second, I've owned much uglier houses than this one and was thrilled to have them. So what does that make me, a peasant? Third, yes, you're too judgemental.

"First, someone owns this house so posting a picture online without their permission is, IMO, bad form."

Sorry, but anything in public is fair. Wife, kids, law enforcement, all fair.

posting a picture online without their permission is, IMO, bad form

Thus rendering Houzz discussions largely an exercise in flouting social convention.

Properties typical for an area are more salable.

I would never question the taste of the owner of this home. (Though maybe its salability)

Well, Joseph, we disagree.

Nonetheless, it's a valid question: does a home's appearance affect its value and, therefore, its mortgageability. I would say, yes. We know that attractive homes with good curb appeal, well prepped and staged, sell faster and for more money. They are worth more.

Conversely, ugly homes, poorly decorated, cluttered, not landscaped, etc., are less desirable and worth less.

Tax assessors may have to treat houses with the same characteristics the same, but appraisers have more latitude.

I might change my mind if I saw more of the interior, but I don't think it's bad. I don't like the color at all, but I think with just a creative paint job, this could be a charming home. I would not walk away from it if I were looking for a home, based on this exterior shot. I would chose it over a McMansion, without a doubt.

I not only agree with @einportlandor but would say that this post is grounds for termination and it questionable if you have the right to post the pictures.

You were being paid to produce a work product. If the pictures you posted were part of that work product the pictures are not yours to post. They belong to your the person or entity that paid you or your company to do the appraisal. If they were from the MLS listing the images could be searched and found. This could be used to identify the address. Could that information be construed as private information that the lender agreed not to disclose when the loan application was signed? Your on a slippery slope.

Beyond the posting of the picture, your commentary is most likely protected by free speech, but just as you have the right to free speech, your employer has the right to fire people who lack the good judgement not to post negative comments on social media that could reflect badly on their business.

New potential employers also often search for social media accounts and may not hire someone who has posted negative information about their last job or has

If I were your friend I would probably advise you to delete this post.

No one asked, but I totally agree with einportlander and Jennifer above.

Two of the places I work now have guidelines regarding posting on social media and what can be posted regarding the workplace. Certain images, even if they are not labeled with any identification could lead to disciplinary action. I also know that social media platforms are searched when people submit resumes, to see what sorts of things people post publicly. I know of at least one person who did not get hired because of ongoing criticism of her previous workplace, and one who did not get a new contract because of things like regularly calling out sick and then posting photos of a day out and about. Not a fireable offense to use sickdays but that information was tucked away and used at contract renewal time.

I also have a friend who is going through the interesting experience of seeing her former house get renovated on Instagram. It's someone else's house now and of course they are giving the decorator permission to post. But the posts are littered with (completely unwarranted IMO) criticisms of the existing house.

The house was completely renovated in 2017, not for resale there were not plans to move at the time, and everything was classic and high quality, Okay so people have different tastes.

But the posts say things like "Out with the dated____" or Can't wait to get rid of____" or "Goodbye ugly____". It's not unethical, but it's certainly not professional.

Well it's not attractive but I've seen worse. Evening out the roof line by getting rid of those two cutouts (?) should be relatively cheap improvement. The bathroom looks like the renovators ran out of money -- not attractive, but not difficult to do over, better.

I understand there are many factors for a mortgage company to consider, but is the potential buyer's "future renovation plan" one of them?

I resent the name Canuckistan totally. As for the house as a lender you have no class posting that pic and your comments are both very unprofessional. Maybe get another day job. It is always up to a lender to decide if or not to lend so pass on this . if you can't do it.

As per Wiki,

"some genuinely critical anti-Canadianisms such as "Soviet Canuckistan" are embraced by some Canadians as humorous, in defiance of the original intent."

Having just spent 3.5 years to obtain a two-family home building permit, I think Canuckistan is a perfect embodiment of the love of slow-moving statist bureaucracy in some of this country's jurisdictions. (But, then, I don't reside on the Left Coast!)

That some of the perceptive posters whose tags I recognize think it's not all that bad is worth considering.

Rejecting a mortgage application due to perceived salability is not a protected ground for discrimination under our Human Rights Code.

Who said Rejecting a mortgage application due to perceived salability is discriminatory?

What we are saying is that you shouldn't show the house that you are appraising and comment negatively on social media about that home. It is in poor taste, unethical and may be illegal unless you have right of ownership of the pictures. (taking the pictures is not enough - if you were paid to take the pictures they belong to the person who paid you.).

Someone who rejects a mortgage application due to “perceived salability” and ignores Applicant creditworthiness, comparable sales and the loan to market value ratio is probably not doing a good job and not following best underwriting practices.