Alleged misrepresentation that a property has ‘panoramic views’
Facts: The Complainant purchased a property which was part of a development. The Complainant alleged that as a result of new houses built across the street, she lost the ‘panoramic views’ that the Licensee had represented to her on several occasions, in the Licensee’s advertising. The Complainant argued that as the views were obstructed, she needed to redesign her house and build two stories. The Complainant requested a remedy, being compensation for the cost of a second storey.
Decision: The CAC took no further action on the complaint. It noted the evidence showed the Licensee went to some lengths to demonstrate the views that would be obtainable after houses are built across the street, and that while those views would not be the same as when the Complainant made her initial site visits, she could nevertheless still enjoy expansive views. The Licensee had attempted to demonstrate building heights to the Complainant, and also urged the Complainant to include a 20 working-day due diligence clause. However, the CAC did note the Complainant’s photographic evidence was a little misleading, as it was taken from a low angle that maximised the obstruction, and noted the Licensee’s photos showed the views more accurately.