Independent agency changes ‘misleading’ property ad after complaint

Carter Shaw, based in Poole, Dorset, agreed the wording of discounts on a management service ad should be altered after an approach from the Advertising Standards Authority.

Carter Shaw office

Independent estate agency Carter Shaw agreed to change a ‘misleading’ advert after a complaint led to an investigation by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).

Carter Shaw, based in Poole, Dorset (main picture), which incorporates Barton Property management specialists and has been in business for over 15 years, accepted that the wording in the ad could be misinterpreted.

The ad related to discounts offered for a full property management service.

Misleading

A spokesperson for the ASA told The Negotiator: “We received a complaint about a website advertising a full property management package for landlords.

“A complainant challenged whether the discounts advertised and the wording used in the ad were misleading.

“We approached the advertiser about the concerns that had been raised and they agreed to make changes to their advertising to address the complaint. Because of this we resolved the case informally, without the need for formal investigation.”

Breached rules

Last month, a multi-branch estate agency in Lancashire agreed to change an advert following a complaint that it wasn’t clearly a marketing communication.

Petty Real Estates, which has three high street branches, was approached by the ASA over the ad after the complainant said it breached rules on the use of consumer data.

And earlier this year, Haart agreed to remove photos from a property listing after a complaint to the ASA was also resolved informally.

Protect privacy

The complainant claimed the images were misleading because they didn’t show the current condition of the property.

The ASA raised the issue with Haart, which is part of the Spicerhaart Group, and the estate agency responded by saying that the pictures were from a previous listing to protect the privacy of the sitting tenant.

Haart then agreed to take the pictures down until they could replace them with more recent photographs, and the ASA closed the case.

More ASA cases


What's your opinion?

Back to top button