レビュヌはレビュアヌの個人的な意芋であるため、特定の蚘茉内容を怜蚌するこずはありたせん。ただし、ビゞネス䞊の取匕が行われたこずを確認できた堎合、レビュヌに「確認枈み」のラベルを付ける堎合がありたす。詳现はこちら

プラットホヌムの健党性を維持するため、圓瀟のプラットフォヌム䞊のすべおのレビュヌは、確認枈みか吊かにかかわらず、幎䞭無䌑で皌働する自動゜フトりェアによっお審査されおいたす。このテクノロゞヌは、本圓の経隓に基づいおいないレビュヌなど、ガむドラむンに違反するコンテンツを特定し、削陀するよう蚭蚈されおいたす。ただし、すべおを怜知できるわけではありたせんので、お気づきの点がございたしたら、どうぞお知らせください。詳现はこちら

1.8

期埅以䞋

TrustScore 5段階評䟡の2

16件のレビュヌ

5぀星
4぀星
3぀星
2぀星
1぀星

この䌁業のTrustpilot 利甚方法

レビュヌや評䟡の取埗方法、スコアリング、モデレヌションのプロセスに぀いお確認する。

Trustpilot に参加しおいる䌁業は、むンセンティブを提䟛したり、レビュヌを非衚瀺にするためにお金を払ったりするこずは蚱可されおいたせん。レビュヌはレビュアヌの個人的な意芋で、Trustpilot のものではありたせん。詳现はこちら

5぀星のうち1の評䟡

scam product, subscription hard to cancel

Makes subscription after free trial hard to cancel, i thought I had cancelled but continued to get charged. Does not send any emails about charges or provide receipts, so it's charges will sneak in if you aren't a hawk on your credit card statement.

The value of the service is also non-existant. Did not provide any information about any property i looked at that was not freely available on Zillow.

2026幎4月7日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Doesn’t even consider Hurricane Helene as a flood event in Asheville

We’re buying a house in Olivette Farms outside of Asheville NC. First Street puts the flood risk at 10/10.
Flood waters didn’t get within 25 vertical feet of the house in Hurricane Helene.
It would take a flood 2 1/2 times greater than Helene ( a 1000 year event) to reach our property.

14 months after Helene, First Street doesn’t even have Helene figured in its calculations for our property.

So, it comes down to who are you going to believe. First Street’s model with incomplete data, or your own lying eyes.
Perhaps the model has some value in aggregate, but it’s worthless applied to any one particular property.

2025幎11月20日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Need a CLASS ACTION!

My then Realtor put gps for our house in a creek. Hence First Street put us in a 9/10 flood zone. For a house and park like acreage this has caused is untold monetary damages. First Street sends canned responses, they refuse to look at FEMA maps, GPS dot has been moved yet their maps still show us flooding! I filed a complaint with BBB and was assured it would be fixed in 1-2 weeks which hasn’t happened. They are an unconscionable conglomerate with only one goal, MONEY.

2025幎9月15日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Inaccurate info impacting real estate values

They are very misleading in their information. They say things like this county has flooded in the past on a specific address. This makes it sound like this address has flooded. It is vague and not necessary. Of course a county has experienced flooding you morons. They rated my address a 9 when it is in a non flood zone. It has never flooded there. They are a business model that is preying on fear. They want you to subscribe so you can get their reports. They also own insurance company. They are ruining people's investments. I'm not sure if I'll be able to sell my home now because of them.

2025幎8月18日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Another global warming ruse.

This is just a ‘global warming’ scam company that has been able to sell itself to a bunch of other companies to make them feel good with virtue signaling. Their data is very questionable and in my case inaccurate. They are disrupting home sales and likely other businesses with their faulty data. There is not a sensible way to challenge their inaccuracy.

2025幎8月12日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Zero Stars are not allowed. First St is a SCAM

Zero Stars are not allowed. Like others we to are experiencing trying to sell property that now has a First St rating of 9 Extreme for flood risk. The timing of this rating coincides with our listing. This fake contradicts FEMA's maps and at 1158 ft of elevation, all of Southern NH would need to be underwater before we flood. We are 63 ft above a river that flows down a valley at several hundred feet per mile,
When I drilled down into "our" data they have a fabricated flood map implying it is FEMA and further drill down they have a completely different address that doesn't exist in this town. Our property is a 2 unit Townhouse. Our side has a 9 risk and the other side of the building has no risk. Other homes next door have no risk. Homes below us on the river have no risk.
And then they provide convenient links to Flood Insurance providers.
Their reply is boilerplate basically stating that we don't understand.
The action needs to come from these real estate websites like Zillow and Realty.com that pay First Street.

2025幎8月8日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

I would give it ZERO STARS IF I COULD

I would give it ZERO STARS IF I COULD
I would give it ZERO STARS IF I COULD. Their report incorrectly identifies my property as being in a major flood zone. This is simply not true; my home's location at the highest elevation in the county means that if my property were at risk, every single home in the area would also be affected. The assertion that the Thorapple River runs through my property is also completely false. This misinformation is causing undue stress, particularly as I'm currently trying to sell my home, a property I purchased in 2024 with no indication of flood risk whatsoever. The inaccurate report from First Street is directly hindering the sale. I have filed a complaint with the AG of NY, HUD secretary, letter to Trump and Vance, letters to both senators in my state. I am not going to lay down and allow this company to ruin our investment we worked all our lives to secure. I live on the highest point of our county. Yet only our house is showing in a major flood zone. Seems like no one is listening. I wrote Matthew Eby CEO of First Street an email with no response. This never ends with them. The news in NC covered this and First Street took their home off but has left thousands of others to disagree with this fraudulent fake generated hypothetical nonsense to be on every home selling website

2025幎5月28日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Couldn't be more inaccurate-total scam

This company's modeling is extremely inaccurate. If they can predict future climate change then why don't they help out the National Weather Service with predicting the weather. They have hurt the sale of my home when they rated me a 9/10 for severe flood damage. I have lived in my home for 23 years, lived through many nor'easters and hurricane Sandy, do not live near any body of water, and have NEVER had any flooding nor a drop of water in my basement. It's a total scam and am thinking a lawsuit is in order. My lawyer wrote them and we never heard back

2025幎7月1日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Completely inaccurate flood rating

Completely inaccurate flood rating. My home went through Helene without any water flooding or ingress issues. Due to the elevation and orientation it is impossible for the buildings or the property in general to flood yet the rating given by Firststreet’s model is “extreme”. This also applies to most of my neighborhood which experienced zero flooding during Helene. This company is not to be trusted.

2025幎6月12日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

26 Balsam High Rd.

26 Balsam High Rd., Candler, NC 28715

Dear First Street,
Your pathetic business model as it relates to Flood Factor does not take much inspection to realize you are selling fear, and you should be ashamed. We live here at 26 Balsam High Road, in Candler, North Carolina, 28715, and we watched last September 27 as Hurricane Helene dumped 16 inches of rain on us and our 5 neighbors. And guess what, the FEMA Flood Maps are accurate. The flooding behind our house of Bill Moore Creek was just what was predicted.
That “once in a thousand years” event did not even rise onto our property. The engineers who designed our new development were accurate in not allowing building to occur in the Riparian Area set aside as a green zone, actually the FEMA flood zone. Our crawl space access door, the lowest elevation of our house, is 7 feet higher than Helene, and is still 8 feet lower than our lower level floor. SEVEN FEET of additional flooding CAN NOT OCCUR because at that elevation there are no longer restrictions to limit flow downstream.

So, WE DISPUTE YOUR PROPERTY SCORE. And we expect you to remove the “8 out of 10, SEVERE FLOOD FACTOR” from our property immediately. The damage you may have already done to our property value may be irreversible.

As you already know, your KEY INSIGHTS FOR THIS PROPERTY is not only deliberately misleading, but any links to see what might actually be TRUE, cost money, which you claim is provided with a FREE TRIAL, requiring my Credit Card. I DID NOT PROVIDE IT.

You provide MORE!!! Flood Overview, Flood History, Flood Current and Future Maps, Flood Community Risk Maps, Flood Damage Forecast, Flood Insurance and FEMA Zone, and finally Flood Damage Preventions (all conveniently available at a cost). ALL OF THESE FLOOD! FLOOD! FLOOD! ITEMS REQUIRE A CREDIT CARD.

But don”t worry, you have warned us with your big Don’t Even Try To Dispute Policy, in bold print: “If you contact customer support regarding a score dispute, you should not expect a personalized response.”

Then you provide the Catch 22 exception. We just get FEMA to write us a LETTER OF MAP AMENDMENT. WHICH THEY WOULD NEVER DO BECAUSE OUR PROPERTY IS NOT IN THEIR FLOOD ZONE. Or, you say just get a new BASE FLOOD ELEVATION. And again, WHY WOULD FEMA ISSUE REGULATORY STANDARDS FOR OUR HOUSE WHEN IT IS NOT IN THEIR FLOOD ZONE. So I do expect a personalized response, Wednesday.

You may “Trust Your Science”, but this scientist calls bologna! Your advanced algorithms fail here. You may “Believe in The Accuracy of Your Data and the Reliability of your Methodologies” but BELIEF IS NOT SCIENCE. You might also believe in the Tooth Fairy, or even in Trickle Down Economics, but it does not make it SCIENCE!!!

I suggest that you have screwed up, and I suggest that you fix it, please. Perhaps where you so proudly, in the primary position, post the Flood Factor, you could just label our property, 26 Balsam High Rd., Caandler, NC 28715:

“UNTOUCHED BY HURRICANE HELENE”

2025幎5月30日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

First Street's flood risk factors defy logic and the laws of physics

First Street assigned our property at 17 Bohemian Lane, Asheville, NC, a 10/10 Extreme flood risk factor, their highest rating. This is absurd for at least three reasons:
1. It is physically impossible for our property to flood. It’s located above 2500 feet on sloping terrain. Water cannot collect on it. During Helene and the three days preceding the storm, an estimated 18 to 22 inches of rain fell where we live. There was no flooding on our property—none. Rainwater that fell at high elevations drained down the mountainsides and flooded valleys. Mountain tops and mountain sides did not flood, not even during Helene.
2. First Street’s 10/10, 99.90% flood risk designation for our property is completely at odds with FEMA’s and that of the North Carolina Emergency Management Flood Risk Information System (NCEM FRIS). Both of which rate our property as Zone X (unshaded): “an area of minimal risk outside the 500‐year flood and protected by levee from 100‐ year flood zones.” While First Street gives our property their highest flood risk designation, FEMA and NCEM FRIS give it their lowest.
3. The flood risk designations First Street’s has assigned to our property and to our next-door neighbors’ defy the laws of physics and logic. First Street says our property has a 10/10 Extreme flood risk, while the adjacent property (11 Bohemian Lane) and the one next to it (266 Bull Creek Rd.) have a 1/10 Minimal flood risk. It’s not possible for adjacent properties to have polar opposite flood risks. Water doesn’t stay within property lines. Moreover, our house is at the highest elevation among the three, and water flows downhill.
First Street’s methodology, at least for assessing flood risks, is clearly flawed, and its widespread use (major realty sites include First Street's climate risk factors on every property listing) is causing harm.

2025幎5月11日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Scam company run by a Canadian CEO


Scam company run by a Canadian CEO probably financed by Soros to devalue US real estate. Their Flood risk model is totally faulty, they do not respond when presented with proof and questioned on the faulty scoring system. They are a subscription model and that's all they care about, sell subsriptions and devalue homes for sale. Note they only put climate risks on homes for sale, not existing homes that are not for sale. Once sold, the climate risk data disappears as Firststreet has already done their damage. They need to be investigated by the Fed's and shut down for their malicious lies.

2025幎3月30日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

Using my home to sell subscriptions for their reports!

I recently put my home on the market to sell. To my surprise, the environmental risk for flooding is listed as EXTREME by First Street Organization. So, if you first see this and do not open it, a buyer might skip my home. If the tab is opened, it states, my property might flood over the next 30 years due to climate change from rain. It also states there are companies near by pumping pollution into the air. There are no factories in my community. There is a 4/5 risk for wild fires. I live in Georgia with humidity on most days. FEMA has my home listed as an X for flood risk, so I am not sure where this company gets their info. Unfortunately, all of the websites that list homes for sale are showing my home as a risk. If the tabs are opened further, this is really an ad to subscribe to them for the reports. There’s 50 plus homes in my neighborhood (still building) and those homes are listed as minimal risk by First Street. I hope this does not stop the sale of my home.

2025幎4月18日
自発的なレビュヌ
5぀星のうち1の評䟡

First Street FloodFactor™ Accuracy in question

First Street is supposedly nonprofit organization that rates property risk factors. When it comes to flooding, it appears that, based on Internet reviews and complaints against them, First Street calculated risk ("FloodFactor™") is much higher than FEMA.

First Street has given my property a Flood Factor of 5/10, double FEMA's calculated risk. First Street also states that my property flooded in 2017 during Harvey, when in fact, my property has never been flooded. I don't know where First Street is getting their erroneous information but it makes the their Flood Factor™ process suspicious. I tried getting in touch with them, creating a ticket, but when I check their website it shows the ticket closed.

Very suspicious indeed. I trust FEMA, not these guys.

2024幎11月13日
自発的なレビュヌ

レビュヌの察象になっおいる䌁業の方ぞ

プロフィヌルを登録しお、Trustpilot の無料ビゞネス ツヌルにアクセスし、お客様ずの぀ながりを広げおください。

無料アカりントを取埗

Trustpilot ゚クスペリ゚ンス

Trsutpilot のレビュヌは誰でも曞くこずができたす。レビュヌを曞いた人には自分の曞いたレビュヌをい぀でも線集したり削陀したりする暩限があり、それらのレビュヌはアカりントがアクティブである限り衚瀺されたす。

䌁業は、自動招埅を介しおレビュヌを䟝頌するこずができたす。この方法で埗られたレビュヌは、本物の経隓に基づいたものであり、確認枈みのラベルが付䞎されたす。

他の皮類のレビュヌに぀いおの詳现はこちらをご䞀読ください。

プラットフォヌム保護のため、専門チヌムず高床なテクノロゞヌを駆䜿しおいたす。停レビュヌずの闘いに぀いおの詳现はこちらをご䞀読ください。

Trustpilot におけるレビュヌ プロセスの詳现に぀いおはこちらをご芧ください。

よいレビュヌを曞くための8぀のヒントをご芧ください。

確認を行うこずで、Trustpilot に投皿されるレビュヌが [LINK-BEGIN-PEOPLE]実圚の人物[LINK-END-PEOPLE] によっお曞かれたものであるこずの保蚌に぀ながりたす。

レビュヌに察しおむンセンティブを提䟛したり、遞択的にレビュヌを䟝頌したりするこずは、TrustScore にバむアスを生む可胜性がありたす。これは 圓瀟のガむドラむンに反したす。

詳现情報