‘It’s a scam’: Zillow accused of using ‘fake climate risk data’ to tank home values – Online Realtor’s ‘Climate Risk Assessment’ Attracts Suspicion – Flagging homes as ‘high risk’ that have never flooded & are not in FEMA zones

Property owners of large estates looking to sell should make routine check ins with their listings to make sure climate activists have not sabotaged the real value of what they are offering. Otherwise, they could be victimized by misinformation that discourages potential buyers. That’s one of the key lessons a real estate broker learned after her clients advised her of an unsettling bit of info that appeared to be inserted on the sly and then later removed.

Here is their story.

Just a half hour or so after Stephanie Cross sent an email to an online real estate marketplace company to dispute the “climate risk assessment” the company attached to a multimillion-dollar property in North Carolina, Cross received an inquiry she views as “suspicious” and worthy of further investigation.

The intrigue began sometime back in February of this year when the online realtor known as Zillow, headquartered in Seattle, began including climate risk data with its listing for the property in question. Cross, who is a licensed real estate broker herself in North Carolina and Tennessee, told Restoration News in an interview that it was her clients who first took notice of the climate data linked with their property on Zillow’s site. Cross is attempting to sell the $6.2 million estate on behalf of an elderly couple who would like to relocate to Georgia so they can be closer to their children.

The problem, Cross explained, is that Zillow included what she says is an “inaccurate and misleading” 9 out of 10 “flood risk” rating with the listing for the North Carolina estate on their online page, citing a recommendation for flood insurance. The rating originates from a third-party vendor called First Street Foundation, a government-funded organization pushing climate risk data to platforms like Zillow, Realtor.com, and Homes.com. But since the property is not in the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA) floodplain, and was not affected by Hurricane Helene, the deadly tropical storm that ravaged parts of North Carolina last year, Cross is making the argument that the First Street flood rating makes no sense. So, what’s really happening?

“What I see is a coordinated attack on property value and land ownership,” Cross said. “With these arbitrary climate risk assessments, properties suddenly become undesirable, undervalued, and uninsurable. Sellers are being worn down and pressured to carry unnecessary insurance or forced to sell at a loss.”

The 6.2 million estate sits on 128 acres with a natural water source, rolling pasture, and an 8,000 sq ft home. The property had been highly coveted, Cross recalls, when it first went on the market. But that’s not the case now.

(READ MORE: The LA Riots Aren’t Gavin Newsom’s Biggest Defeat—That’d Be the EV Mandate)

FEMA Records in Conflict with Climate Data 

“Since this risk assessment, interest in the property has dramatically slowed,” she said. “After I sent several emails and forwarded the information to different media platforms, the very next day, Zillow changed the report to “off market,” dropped the property value to $401,010, and removed the climate risk data from First Street entirely. ” The new link to the Zillow’s listing  for the property available here does not include the climate assessment.

The email Cross sent to Zillow on March 24, 2025, appeared to be what spurred the changes to Zillow’s site even though she never received a response from Zillow. Cross made several critical points in her message to the online realtor. She informed Zillow that not only wasn’t the property in FEMA’s flood zone, but that FEMA’s Flood Risk Information System (FRIS) confirms there is no flood risk. But from here it gets worse. Cross makes the critical point that Homes.Com uses the same First Street data as Zillow but lists the property as having a minimal flood risk. How can that be? How can the same vendor give two completely different risk assessments?

“We are not just talking about bad data,” Cross said. “It’s misleading and damaging. How can it be legally possible to post inaccurate information? I’d lose my license if I misrepresented data.”

Inquiry Raises Suspicions

That inquiry Cross received about a half hour after she emailed Zillow on March 24 came from someone name David Wintrode, who identified himself as an employee with Civilization Research Institute, previously known as the Consilience Project. In an email message to Cross, Wintrode expressed his interest in the property and Cross promptly called him.

“He asked me if it was possible to build multiple buildings on the property,” Cross said. “I told him yes and told me that he wanted it to be a headquarters for his company. But I then explained to him that it’s in a rural area, and it’s not really a good place for a company headquarters.”

The Civilization Research Institute website is somewhat lacking in information about the company, but Cross views it as an environmental activist group. The institute’s LinkedIn page is a bit more detailed and says that the institute “works to support the emergence of a mature global civilization capable of wisely stewarding the unprecedented power of exponential technologies, in concert with an enduringly healthy biosphere, while avoiding the twin failure modes of catastrophes and dystopias.”

Try Disputing the Climate Data and Be Prepared to Jump Through Hoops 

First Street, headquartered in New York, describes itself on LinkedIn as “the standard for climate risk financial modeling.” The five areas of risk displayed on Zillow listings are: flood, wildfire, wind, heat, and air quality.

Cross has had just as much difficulty trying to get in touch with First Street as she has with Zillow. As she explains it, First Street’s Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) page states that if you’re a seller or broker disputing their data, they will not respond unless you submit an official FEMA flood certificate.

Meanwhile Cross is still working to sell the property for what it is worth. But she remains concerned about the machinations of climate activists who have burrowed into widely read online platforms that either motivate or discourage potential buyers.