We seem always to have to explain two things:
- Your MLS does not have to provide MLS data to RPR in order to get public records from RPR. (Though I don't know personally of MLSs using the API who are not licensing data to RPR, I take RPR at its word that an MLS does not need to license data to RPR to use the API.)
- The RPR agreement for its public record API provides none of the assurances you would normally expect from a public records provider. For example, RPR can terminate the agreement and stop providing public records to your MLS without notice; RPR does not warrant non-infringement; your MLS agrees to indemnify RPR, but not the other way round; etc. (See the agreement for the API at: http://blog.narrpr.com/tax-api .)
But if your MLS currently has a public records agreement and wants a source of public records on which it can rely, the RPR API is not a good substitute for a contract with CoreLogic, LPS, iMapp, or one of the other providers out there.
Your thoughts?
-Brian
11 comments:
Today, the practical reality is that the public records API is only available to those MLSs delivering listing data. Also, SSO (pretty much a requirement to implement the API properly) is only available for MLSs delivering listing data back to RPR (at least at this stage).
There's also the matter of RPR's public record data quality and depth.
Now that I've had a chance to see RPR's data, I'd say there is no way for an MLS or REALTOR® to rely on the data provided.
They are missing entire zip codes of public record data (at least in the ARMLS coverage area), sales and foreclosure filings are months behind and they have many properties marked as distressed that aren't.
I've only been able to spend an hour looking over the shoulder of a user but in that time uncovered enough issues to question the data and wonder if it's systemic.
I haven't seen any articles that explore the RPR data quality issue and the fact the some people think that all public records data is the same is just not true.
Robert Drummer
(Disclosure, I work for iMapp and have a vested interest in the quality of data provided to our MLS clients)
@Mike: Thanks for update. I know RPR will chime in if they differ with you.
@Robert: Thanks (a) for your observation, and (b) for your candor about your personal interest. As for the former, I'd like to hear from other users of the RPR API or RPR system data out there about their impressions of its public record data quality.
As for the latter, you reminded me that I should make a disclosure: My consulting firm is doing a consulting project for NAR (owner of RPR). Though it has nothing directly to do with RPR, I guess I should say that for full disclosure.
-Brian
Just to make sure I'm clear, I am not objecting to or being critical of RPR's practical decision to beta test the API with those MLSs signing up to provide listings first. It makes sense to roll out the service in stages and the early sign ups make an obvious first stage.
It would be nice to hear from other early adapters of RPR. I have not heard any other reports about unreliable data. Robert, did the user you were piggybacking on contact RPR about the incorrect data? I'd want to know how they respond to such an issue.
Thank you for bringing this subject up.
I posed the same question to the rep from RPR that I spoke with several months ago. At that time, he informed me that RPR would only be pulling the PR data on a yearly basis. I had serious reservations about that because obviously 1 time a year is not often enough.
I hope they have changed or will change that time frame.
The user did not contact RPR about the issues but I've brought it up to RPR employees via Twitter and in-person at the NAR annual conference in New Orleans.
They originally said 300 million records would be updated by November 5th. Then I was told it would be held up until after the NAR conference.
I've asked twice since then and there has been no response.
This started when one of our AZ users asked why RPR showed a Notice of Trustee Sale on a property and our (iMapp) system did not.
We researched the issue and found that a release had been recorded 6 months earlier and we cleared the Notice of Sale at that time.
That led to a list of questions that I was able to ask of an RPR user.
The results indicated that Notices of Sale hadn't been updated since July, 2010.
I also saw that searching on some zip codes showed no listings when there were 1800+ actives and some MLS sales weren't showing up 75 days after closing.
RPR has a compelling UI and it's easy to understand that people like the look and feel of the product.
The large update may address all of these issues but the questions remain as to how often the data is updated, are different records updated on different schedules, etc.
I would suggest that any MLS that is considering replacing their tax data supplier with RPR take a closer look at the data.
Hi Brian, it hadn't occurred to me until I read and thought about this post that adopting a free API would represent much of a paradigm shift. So much content over the last several years has become available in this format, from publishers and search engines of every stripe and in many industries - and has, in turn, been so broadly adopted (as we have seen in our industry via Google, Zillow, Trulia, and even formerly at Cyberhomes) - that this approach to distribution now seems fairly mainstream. And this is a trend that, personally, I predict will only expand over time, given its natural fit to the way the Web works.
But I think you're right to point out that anyone (everyone) used to licensing public records from a vendor will have to think about what it means to take a different approach. It won't be familiar. And it may indeed not be right for everyone, or at least not right away.
And just as the conversation about RPR has taken a while to get equilibrium in some quarters, we figure that this API will follow a somewhat similar trajectory. That's why we put it out as a beta - to get feedback, learn from it, and put the experience to work in order to deliver as much benefit as we can to as many people as possible.
Mike is 100% correct in pointing this out, and his company has been very proactive in getting it into the hands of his clients. Over time, as others try it out, I think a different cost-benefit calculus will come into play than the one most folks are accustomed to engaging in. As is usually the case, the only way to know is to take it for a spin.
Hi Marty, Just to be clear, are you speaking for RPR?
@Marty: I think you are right about the possibility of a paradigm shift in thinking about MLS access to public records.
MLSs that adopt that view still have to address the current paradigm, especially as MLS subscribers are accustomed to it, and as the customers, their needs are paramount.
Can you comment on Mike's suggestion that as a practical matter, it is only MLSs that have signed a data license with RPR that are getting the public record API right now? (I agree with him that this would not be unreasonable, but I'd love to make sure we have the record correct.)
-Brian
We have provided the API as a beta to seven MLSs - not all of which are current licensors of RPR.
To clarify one other minor point - SSO is not required either - the API provides links to RPR that can be used with or without SSO, and optionally - even if the MLS licenses to RPR.
Post a Comment