Picture this: you’re scrolling through property listings on a rainy evening, looking for somewhere to call home. A Victorian terrace catches your eye. The photos show a cosy living room with a velvet sofa, a dining table set for dinner, and a bedroom with soft bedding and warm lighting. You book a viewing, excited. But when you arrive, the rooms are bare. No sofa, no table, no bedding. The furniture in the photographs was never there—it was conjured by artificial intelligence. It’s a scenario that is becoming increasingly common in the world of estate agency, and the BBC’s recent conversations with agents reveal just how divisive the practice has become. For some, AI-generated staging is a clever way to help sellers save money and help buyers visualise a space. For others, it raises uncomfortable questions about honesty and the danger of presenting a property as something it is not. Buying or renting a home is an emotionally charged process. People pour their savings, their hopes and their futures into what they see online. When images are digitally altered, the line between showing a home’s potential and hiding its reality begins to blur. The technology is not inherently dishonest—it can be used to show what a room might look like with furniture—but it demands a level of care and transparency that the industry is still working out. Estate agents are not the only players. Online property portals like Rightmove hold enormous power, and they have made clear that they are watching. The issue has become a test of professionalism, ethics and common sense, and the agents who spoke to the BBC offered a range of perspectives, from enthusiastic acceptance to thoughtful caution. What follows is not a simple verdict on whether AI in property is good or bad. It is a glimpse into how a traditional, people-centred industry is adapting to a world in which a picture can no longer be taken at face value.
At the heart of the pro-AI argument is David Vaughan, director of Aston Vaughan, an estate agency in Sussex. He described virtual staging as a way to “solve a problem for both sides.” The problem, for sellers, is money. Physical staging—hiring furniture and designers to dress a home for viewings—can cost anywhere from £5,000 on average to a staggering £50,000 for a premium property. For many homeowners, that expense is simply impossible, especially when they may already be stretched by moving costs. Yet an empty house can feel cold and uninviting, and even prospective buyers who are good at imagining things can struggle to judge the scale of a room without a bed or sofa in it. “Buyers have told us empty rooms are hard to read for scale, and virtually dressing a room makes it much easier to understand how you would actually live in it,” Vaughan explained. His argument is a practical one: if you can’t afford to rent real furniture, why not use software to create a realistic vision of how the space could be used? The images are not intended to trick anyone; they are intended to help. In a competitive market, a listing that sits unseen can be a disaster. A virtual makeover can make a bare apartment feel like a home, giving buyers the emotional hook they need to book a viewing. For Vaughan, AI is not replacing the human touch—it’s simply modernising a service that used to be available only to the wealthy. Middle-class sellers can now have their homes presented with the polish of a show home, without spending a fortune. It’s a democratic shift, and one that many smaller agencies would struggle to survive without. But even as he praised the technology, Vaughan’s comments hinted at the need for balance. Staging, whether physical or digital, is ultimately about showing a property in its best light. The question is what happens when the light becomes too flattering, and the image drifts away from the actual property. For now, Aston Vaughan’s position is clear: AI is a tool that solves real problems, but it must be used with judgment and respect. The challenge for other agents, and for the industry as a whole, is to keep that judgment sharp as the technology becomes more powerful and more convincing.
Warren Powell-Richards, an estate agency based in Surrey and Hampshire, takes a broader view, seeing AI as an unavoidable part of the industry’s future. In a world increasingly dependent on digital technology, the agency argues, rejecting AI outright would be “madness.” But its enthusiasm is not blind. “The challenge for estate agents is ensuring they don’t get carried away with the possibilities at the expense of the customer experience,” it said. This is a crucial point, because estate agency is ultimately a people business. For all the algorithms, virtual tours and high-resolution photographs, the reason buyers and sellers choose an agent is usually trust. They want someone who listens, who understands their situation, and who will guide them through one of life’s most stressful journeys. AI can help with that journey—by creating better images, generating descriptions, perhaps even predicting what buyers want—but it cannot hold someone’s hand when a sale falls through, or explain a difficult survey report with patience and empathy. The agency’s philosophy is summed up in a simple but powerful phrase: AI is “a tool, and not a substitute for trust.” That means using technology to enhance the service, not to replace the human relationship that sits at the core of the profession. It also means being honest with customers. A buyer might appreciate a beautifully staged image, but they will appreciate it more if they know it’s virtual. If an agent lets them believe a sofa comes with the house, the discovery that it doesn’t will feel like a betrayal, and that feeling can destroy the reputation of an agency in an instant. In an age of online reviews and social media, one negative experience can echo far beyond a single transaction. Warren Powell-Richards seems to understand this, balancing the potential of AI with a clear sense of responsibility. The future, in its vision, is not a choice between human and machine. It is a partnership in which technology makes the process smoother, while humans provide the judgement, warmth and accountability that no algorithm can replicate. That may be the most realistic and sustainable approach to an industry that is being reshaped by digital innovation.
Miles & Barr, an estate agent based in East Kent, offered perhaps the most matter-of-fact perspective. A spokesperson said that the use of AI and CGI to help prospective buyers and tenants visualise a property had been “common practice for some time.” This is an important reminder that the current debate is not entirely new. Estate agents have long used computer-generated floor plans, digital illustrations of new developments, and even photographs of empty buildings with furniture dropped in through photo-editing software. The difference now is that AI makes these images faster, cheaper and almost impossibly convincing. A decade ago, virtual staging might have required a skilled graphic designer and hours of Photoshop work. Today, a few clicks can produce a room that looks like it belongs in a magazine, with textures, shadows and perspectives that are almost indistinguishable from a real photograph. For Miles & Barr, the technology is simply a natural extension of what agents have always done: presenting a property in a way that sparks imagination. Empty rooms can be bleak, particularly in winter months when the light is poor and bare walls make even a good home feel cold. A virtual armchair or a pendant light can warm up the scene and help a buyer see the possibilities. This is not necessarily deception; it is visualisation, a form of storytelling that has always been part of selling homes. Yet there is a line between helping someone imagine a future in a property and misrepresenting what is actually there. What happens if the AI-generated furniture is too large, making a room look more spacious than it is? What if the virtual decor hides a cracked wall or an awkward layout? Miles & Barr’s comment suggests that, in many cases, the practice is so normalised that agents may not even stop to think about the ethical boundaries. But as AI imagery becomes more sophisticated, the need for clear rules and honest disclosure grows. The public may not mind seeing a virtual sofa in a living room, but they do mind feeling that they have been tricked. The key, as with any tool, is to use it responsibly and to remember that a home is not just a collection of pixels—it’s a place where real people will eventually live. The more agents can keep that human reality in mind, the less likely they are to let technology lead them astray.
Perhaps the most important voice in this debate is Rightmove, the online property portal where millions of people begin their home hunting. Rightmove does not create the listings; it hosts them, and its spokespeople were unequivocal about where responsibility lies. “Agents are responsible for the content they upload,” they said. “It’s critically important that people see accurate representations of properties on our platform.” This is more than a simple statement of terms and conditions; it is an acknowledgment that trust is the lifeblood of a property portal. If buyers begin to question whether the photos on Rightmove show reality, the entire platform loses its value. Rightmove also outlined the consequences for agents who push the boundaries too far: “We take action where images are found to be misleading, including requiring amendments, removing the listing from our platform and taking further action where necessary.” These are strong words, but they also highlight a practical problem. How does a platform police millions of images? AI can be used to create images, and AI can also be used to detect manipulation, but the battle is not always straightforward. Some misleading images are obvious—a clearly expanded room, a door that seems to lead nowhere, a window that has been moved across a wall. Others are more subtle, involving changes to lighting, perspective or the addition of furniture that was never there. Rightmove’s position makes it clear that enforcement must start with estate agents themselves. They are the gatekeepers of accurate information, and if they are willing to blur reality, they risk not only their own reputation but the credibility of the entire industry. For buyers and tenants, the message is equally important: be curious, ask questions, and don’t be afraid to challenge what you see. A good agent will be happy to explain whether an image is real or virtually staged. A bad agent will avoid the question. In the end, a platform can only do so much; the relational accountability between agent and customer remains essential. Rightmove’s role as a giant marketplace gives it power, but its statements suggest a desire to exercise that power fairly, protecting consumers while allowing honest agents to use new technology responsibly.
At its heart, this is not a story about algorithms and software. It’s a story about people trying to find a home, and about the people who help them find it. For every seller who heaves a sigh of relief at not having to spend £50,000 on rented furniture, there is a buyer standing in an empty room, trying to work out whether the sofa in the photo will fit against that wall. The technology can bridge that gap, but only if it is used with honesty and imagination. There is something genuinely wonderful about being able to look at a blank, dusty room and see it transformed into a bright bedroom with a bed, a mirror, and the morning sun streaming through the curtain. That vision can inspire a buyer to take a chance on a property they might otherwise have dismissed. But the same technology can also be abused, and when it is, it hurts not only the buyer but the reputation of the agent and the wider industry. The challenge is to keep the human being at the centre of the transaction—to use AI to enhance, not obscure, the truth. The agents who spoke to the BBC seem to understand this in different ways. Some are deeply enthusiastic, others more cautious, but none are willing to dismiss the technology altogether. That is probably the right attitude. The future will be built on a careful partnership between human intuition and digital possibility, where a computer can suggest a beautiful sofa, but only a person can ask, “Does this feel like home?” For those who are navigating the property market, the lesson is simple: let your imagination be sparked by the images, but let your eyes and your questions guide the final decision. And for the agents, the message is just as clear: use the tools at your disposal, but never forget that the best listings are not just a collection of perfect pictures—they are the beginning of a human story. If you have experienced the new world of AI-staged listings, or have a view on how far the industry should go, BBC Sussex would love to hear from you, via email at [email protected] or WhatsApp at 08081 002250, and you can follow BBC Sussex on Facebook, X and Instagram. The conversation, much like the technology, is only just beginning.