Eliza Wong
A government-backed real estate portal in Haikou has become the unlikely source of both amusement and concern among homebuyers, with listings showing properties priced at zero yuan, 100 yuan, and even 20.7 million yuan per square meter. These bizarre listings—ranging from ‘free homes’ to astronomical prices—have exposed critical weaknesses in how property data is verified and regulated, even on official platforms. The Haikou Housing Bureau has acknowledged the irregularities and initiated corrective measures, but the incident raises broader questions about real estate market transparency and policy enforcement.
– Government housing portal displayed properties listed at zero yuan, 100 yuan, and over 20 million yuan
– Homebuyers reported contacting sellers only to find properties were already sold or listings were fraudulent
– Haikou Housing Bureau admitted listings were user-generated and unverified for accuracy
– Exploitation of ‘old-for-new’ housing policy suspected as motive for fake listings
– Personal listing portal has been shut down pending investigation and system improvements
Bizarre Listings on Official Portal
Homebuyers in Haikou were startled to discover seemingly impossible property listings on the Haikou Residential and Real Estate Information Network, the city’s official housing platform operated by the Haikou Housing Bureau. Among nearly 1,000 listings, numerous properties appeared with prices that defied market logic: 92.68-square-meter units for zero yuan, 102.27-square-meter homes for 100 yuan, and others priced at 200 yuan. At the opposite extreme, an 84.48-square-meter apartment was listed for 17.5 million yuan, equating to approximately 20.7 million yuan per square meter—far exceeding even the most premium real estate markets globally.
These zero-yuan listings and ultra-low-priced properties immediately raised red flags for prospective buyers like Mr. Wu, a recent transplant to Hainan who had been searching for a二手房. ‘No matter how cheap housing gets, nobody sells apartments for the price of a meal,’ he remarked. ‘I suspected either a scam or some kind of system error.’
Failed Attempts to Contact Sellers
Curiosity led several homebuyers to attempt contact with the sellers behind these zero-yuan listings. Mr. Wu reached out to multiple listing agents and property owners, only to find that phone numbers were either disconnected or the representatives claimed the properties had long been sold. When pressed for details about transaction prices or why the listings remained active, respondents cited ‘business secrets’ or outright denied having posted the listings at all.
One ‘seller’ named Mr. Zhang, associated with a 100-yuan listing, expressed surprise when informed his property appeared on the government portal. He stated he had never personally listed the property and suspected that a real estate agency might have misused his information. This pattern repeated across multiple zero-yuan and ultra-low-priced listings, suggesting either widespread misinformation or deliberate manipulation of the platform.
Government Response and Accountability
When confronted with these findings, the Haikou Housing Bureau acknowledged the irregularities but initially defended the platform’s integrity. A department responsible for the website stated that listing prices were entered voluntarily by users and represented ‘market behavior.’ The bureau emphasized that all properties underwent verification checks to confirm ownership, absence of liens or seizures, and transaction eligibility. However, they admitted that price accuracy fell outside their regulatory scope.
Policy Exploitation Suspected
The bureau offered a potential explanation for the zero-yuan listings: homeowners might be exploiting Haikou’s ‘old-for-new’ housing policy. This initiative allows residents to list their existing properties for sale as a precondition for purchasing new homes, often with financial incentives or preferential treatment. By listing their properties—even at absurd prices like zero yuan—homeowners could technically satisfy policy requirements without genuinely intending to sell.
This loophole effectively allows participants to qualify for policy benefits while retaining their properties, undermining both the spirit of the program and the accuracy of the housing market data. The prevalence of zero-yuan listings suggests significant abuse of this system, with homeowners prioritizing personal gain over data transparency.
Technical Flaws and Platform Vulnerabilities
Beyond policy exploitation, the incident revealed technical shortcomings in the government portal. The website allowed users to list properties without robust price validation or automated checks for reasonable valuation ranges. While the platform included features like QR codes for property verification and unique listing IDs, these measures focused on ownership and legal status rather than price integrity.
Inadequate Monitoring Systems
The persistence of sold properties on the platform indicated poor data synchronization between transaction completion and listing removal. Ideally, sales should trigger automatic delisting, but the system relied on manual updates from sellers or agents—a clear vulnerability that enabled the accumulation of outdated or fake listings. The zero-yuan phenomenon highlighted how even basic safeguards were missing, allowing nonsensical data to populate an official government resource.
Industry and Public Reaction
Local real estate professionals expressed dismay at the situation. A manager from a reputable Haikou agency noted that even commercial property portals maintain stricter content controls than the government site. ‘No professional platform would permit zero-yuan listings or obviously fraudulent prices,’ they stated. ‘It damages credibility and public trust.’
Homebuyers and residents echoed these concerns, questioning why a government-operated site lacked basic oversight. Mr. Wu and others argued that the proliferation of zero-yuan listings undermined the platform’s legitimacy and utility, transforming a purported public service into a source of confusion and misinformation.
Corrective Actions and Future Measures
Commitment to TransparencyThe bureau also committed to improving coordination between property transaction records and listing databases, ensuring that sold properties are promptly removed. Future iterations of the platform may include automated price-range checks, mandatory documentation for ultra-low or ultra-high listings, and stricter identity verification for listers.
Broader Implications for Real Estate Markets
The zero-yuan listing incident transcends Haikou, reflecting common challenges in real estate data management worldwide. Government portals often struggle to balance open access with content reliability, particularly when users exploit systems for non-market purposes. This case underscores the need for continuous technical and policy adaptation to maintain data integrity.
Lessons for Other Markets
Other cities and regions can learn from Haikou’s experience. Proactive measures—such as algorithmic price monitoring, mandatory delisting upon sale, and penalties for misuse—could prevent similar issues. Real estate platforms must evolve beyond passive information repositories into dynamically managed ecosystems that prioritize accuracy and trust.
The discovery of zero-yuan listings on Haikou’s government portal serves as a wake-up call for regulators, industry professionals, and homebuyers alike. While the immediate issue has been addressed through the removal of the listing channel, the underlying vulnerabilities require ongoing attention. Strengthening verification processes, closing policy loopholes, and enhancing technical safeguards will be essential to restore and maintain confidence in public real estate resources.
For homebuyers, the incident reinforces the importance of due diligence and skepticism, even when using official platforms. Verify listings through multiple sources, request recent transaction data, and consult licensed professionals before making decisions. For authorities, it highlights the urgent need to modernize digital infrastructure and align housing policies with practical enforcement mechanisms. Only through collaborative effort can we ensure that real estate markets remain transparent, reliable, and fair for all participants.
