Estate Agents False Marketing

lush_walrus

MrJB wrote: »

I fail to see how you can reach that conclusion - guidance for the CPR's clearly state

"Ensuring that any information provided, whether in writing, in pictures or given verbally, is accurate when advertising for new business or when marketing property. Breaches of the regulations might include falsely claiming to be a member of a professional body, misdescribing a property for sale or making unfair comparisons with competitors."

Prior to that we had the Property Misdescriptions Act - How can it be the case that an agent is not responsible for ensuring their material is accurate. When the agent commenced marketing they should have specifically covered the parking position with the owner.

If the EA describes something they can see incorrectly such as a 3rd bedroom and there is none that would be under the regulations. An EA can only use reasonable endeavours and on something such as an alocsted parking space that can not be seen other than on deeds reasonable endevours would be checking the details with the vendor before marketing. We do not know whether that was done, but I'm yet to find an EA who is stupid enough not to.

And to those recommending contacting a managing agent I suspect have had little interaction with that group of people. Their lack of response to anything sale related creates so many delays, their incentive to do anything useful is zero. To sack a managing agent takes a hell of a lot, remember the freeholder employs them the leaseholder pay for them in most instances. Unless self managed that this doesn't sound to be.

lush_walrus

googler wrote: »

Dear Management Agent, we're prospective buyers for (insert flat number), could you tell me which of the flats in (insert development name) have allocated parking, according to your records?

Have you ever issued an access fob to the owners of (insert flat number)?

If (insert flat number) does not have access to the parking garage within the development, do you know of any reason why the other flats do, and this flat does not?


etc

etc

It's not difficult.

I find it difficult to imagine that the original developer granted parking to most flats, but not this one (and/or others).

I don't it's very common. Planning often now limit the number of parking spaces on a development. So typically say there are 100 flats, and the flats are located in an area assumed to have good transport links the site is given what is known as a PTal rating. That rating say 3 states a ratio of parking for tgat specific site. So it is very common that 100 flats may only be permitted to have 80 spaces or even as low as 10 designated for wheelchair users only.

If not designated to wheelchair only, the spaces will be split amongst slaw shared ownership and ha units if there are any. Then either allocated to the bigger units or when the first release of the flats occurs offered as an additinal purchase £10000 for a parking space and in this instance perhaps an option of a garage.

In planning terms a garage would be considered a parking space, a covered one. Therefore, as said previously the purchaser is purchasing a parking space.