Is this misleading or am I being pedantic

BikingBud

Just like London Stanstead airport?

I suspect this is a deliberate ploy and the actions are designed to make those who might not be local and unaware consider the properties are in the village. This seems to be coupled with a generic location dropped on maps and street view, where it is obvious the house is nowhere near the indicated location. Perhaps see where the postcode boundaries are. Bath seems to have a very strong bias (premium ) to central postcodes especially BA1, to the detriment of other areas.

There can be lots of snobbery with old villagers and sometimes disregard or even animosity towards those on the new estate built outside the traditional and potentially long standing boundaries. Although these changes will have been evolving perpetually.

Ultimately it is where it is and the price will reflect that, the new build will be obvious and the "benefits" of being old village may not be the same for all. Would you be happy or not is really the only question?

BarelySentientAI

BikingBud said:

Just like London Stanstead airport?

Others like London Oxford and London Ashford (Lydd) are worse.  Although Paris Beauvais, Oslo Torp and Frankfurt Hahn are also terrible (1 1/2 to 2 hours to the city centre) and Paris Vatry is just stupid.

eddddy

RHemmings said:

I'd like to see the second case in action. Pressure of work prevents me from looking up cases today. 

The Property Ombudsman says (note the bit in bold)   :

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs) require agents to take a different approach to disclosure of information about properties they are marketing from what is considered acceptable practice under the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991.

The new regime requires full disclosure of material information at the earliest opportunity to enable the consumer to make an informed transactional decision, such as whether to view, make an offer and/or accept other services from an agent.

Link: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/learning-points-from-the-cprs-cases

So the Property Ombudsman regards failing to disclose material information before a viewing as breaking the law.

So taking the OP at their word, if a reasonable potential buyer is mislead by the listing, and suffers a financial loss as a result, the Ombudsman has the power to make the EA pay compensation.

But the Ombudsman will look at the facts - for example, would a 'reasonable potential buyer' have looked at the 'map' link in the listing to see where the property actually was, before travelling?

And, to date, I suspect nobody has actually complained to the Ombudsman about something like this - either because they look at the 'map' link before travelling and/or it's not worth the hassle for £20 or £30 worth of petrol money and/or, if they were travelling a long way, they might have booked 2 or 3 other viewings at the same time anyway.

user1977

eddddy said:

The Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs) require agents to take a different approach to disclosure of information about properties they are marketing from what is considered acceptable practice under the Property Misdescriptions Act 1991.

The new regime requires full disclosure of material information at the earliest opportunity to enable the consumer to make an informed transactional decision, such as whether to view, make an offer and/or accept other services from an agent.

Link: https://www.tpos.co.uk/news-media-and-press-releases/case-studies/item/learning-points-from-the-cprs-cases

But the Ombudsman will look at the facts - for example, would a 'reasonable potential buyer' have looked at the 'map' link in the listing to see where the property actually was, before travelling?

Indeed, I don't really see anything material here, unless the developer is otherwise keeping the location secret, bundling potential buyers into the back of a blacked-out van and taking them directly to the sales office, etc....

And it sounds at least arguable that the location is reasonably accurate.