You are here: Home - News -

ASA informally resolves trio of property and estate agency complaints

  • 29/08/2018
  • 0
ASA informally resolves trio of property and estate agency complaints
A triple bill of property-related cases have been informally resolved by the advertising regulator, including one about an online estate agent which failed to clarify how its charges compared to other agents.


The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received a complaint about estate agent Doorsteps, asking whether comparative claims made were misleading and could be substantiated.

Doorsteps has agreed with the regulator to amend its advert to state any material differences between its services or packages and those offered by “the average high street agent” that they were being compared with.

Doorsteps’ website stated: “With Doorsteps you can sell your house for less than a hundred pounds, without leaving your home. An honest, transparent and hassle-free way for you to sell your property, with a great level of service at a fantastic price.”

The regulator noted that small print on the site stated: “Based on a direct comparison of like for like services, provided by the current average high street agent fee of 1.3% (inc VAT) compared to the current fixed fee charged by Doorsteps of £99 inc VAT.”

Doorsteps has since amended its small print to show the average high street estate agent fee of 1.2% and made a comparison using the average London house price. (See image below.)

It also has a comparison with other online estate agents.





False ombudsman claim

Letting agent Collins & Wise Property Management had claimed on its Zoopla listing that it was part of the Property Ombudsman scheme.

A complainant challenged whether the ad was misleading because the claim to be a member of the Property Ombudsman scheme was incorrect.

Collins & Wise agreed to remove this reference in its advert.


Unpermitted image use

Property developer and landlord Heylo Housing has removed images from adverts posted on Facebook after complaints were received that the images had been used without permission and were of properties not for sale.

A complainant to the ASA challenged whether the ad was misleading as it featured an image of their property which had been used without their permission.

Heylo Housing agreed to remove the images from its adverts.





There are 0 Comment(s)

You may also be interested in