H-R

[apexblue]

Last week 29 competitors in Conwy today 69 due to Sykes Cottages.

[Tizfata]

Ouch

[Normandy Cow]

Owners Direct: 250 properties in Normandy
H-R: 1401 properties in Normandy

Double-ouch!

(that is why we are no longer with the latter)

[e-richard]

Algarve has 3463 properties, yet H-R is still my best performing site - for bookings.

Figure that out

[Tizfata]

Tuscany:
OD: 735 properties
HL: 822 properties
H-R: 5024 properties
WOW! Thank NC, I never considered that!
More or less, where are your enquirers from OD?

[Normandy Cow]

Looking at the names, I think 100% are from the UK, but it works for us as we are just 2 hours from Calais so people can pack their car and pop across on a cheap Dover-Calais crossing.

It is by far our best website for enquiries and bookings - but it may not work for you if you are a long way from the UK.

[greenbarn]

apexblue wrote:

Last week 29 competitors in Conwy today 69 due to Sykes Cottages.

Just been having a look through H-R's site - we're on there courtesy of them taking over holidaylets.net.

Sure enough, a few in our area from Sykes. Okay, it does say Sykes Cottages, but there is also a button immediately underneath labelled "Contact Owner", and AFAIK Sykes don't own these places. So that's a tiny bit misleading.

Slightly more misleading are listings where the contact details are an individual's name. Not misleading at all, surely? The button says "Contact Owner", so the lady named above that button must be the owner, right? A very busy owner is Sally, as she "owns" about 40 cottages in the western Lake District. Dig a bit deeper and hey presto! I find the website for Sally's Cottages, the trading name for Sally Ltd (which I think is pretty smart). So an agency, then.

It's entirely up to H-R as to whether they accept agency listings, but should this not be clearly stated in the listing? And isn't having a button clearly stating "Contact Owner" being just a touch, well, devious?

The Office of Fair Trading goes to some lengths to define a misleading advertisement. Here's a few lines pinched from their website:

What is a misleading advertisement?
An advert is misleading if it deceives or is likely to deceive its audience and affect their economic decision-making.

An advert will be likely to affect the economic decision-making of readers if, for example, it persuades them to part with money.


An advert can be deceptive in various ways, for example, if it:


creates a false impression, even if everything stated in it may be literally true.

Now whilst I was searching through H-R listings to get a feel for the numbers of Sykes places, I checked the details for each place and if I saw an individual's name and surname I assumed that person owned the property. It wasn't until I realised that the same name was appearing rather frequently that I recognised my error. IANAL, but I would have to say that I feel I was misled by H-R's advertising, and isn't that just possibly wobbling along the thin line of lawful trading?

Interested in the views of others on this one.

[Windy]

When listing sites start to take large agencies properties on board you quickly get swamped and the attraction of the site goes down the tube pretty much immediately from the owners p.o.v. (One site even started this way - and no WAY would I pay t be on their site next to Hoseasons entire lodge catalogue)

I haven't looked at H-R but to take an agency's properties on them on and then present them individually as owner managed would be not just treading a thin line it'd be dishonest (in my personal opinion in case any lawyers are reading this).

Very dodgy I would say GB.

EDIT - ROFL 10 seconds after posting this I get followed by Sykes Cottages on Twitter

[greenbarn]

Oooops. Do you think there might be lawyers reading?

Just in case, i'd better make it clear that AFAIK H-R aren't making a direct claim that any properties on their site are, or aren't, listed by the owners.

You can make your own judgement as to whether what is shown on their website is misleading - here's a grab of an example (and hopefully I've blotted out enough to make this acceptable for posting - if not apologies and I'm sure Paolo or Brooke will be on the case!)

This is a listing from an agency (and I certainly don't believe the agency is doing anything it shouldn't). The names are female and male, shared surname.
Is it giving the impression that you will be dealing direct with the owner?

[Hells Bells]

Yes, I would assume that I was dealing directly with the cottage owner.

[Windy]

I would assume from that listing that I was dealing witha private let and not an agency.

Surely a company like H-R wouldn't condone an agency appearing to be a private individual would they?

Are you sure that Sally isn't just a very rich landlady?

[greenbarn]

I would assume from that listing that I was dealing witha private let and not an agency.

Surely a company like H-R wouldn't condone an agency appearing to be a private individual would they?

I don't believe H-R are actually providing an option for the difference to be made apparent, so I'm not convinced the agency can be considered blameworthy.

Are you sure that Sally isn't just a very rich landlady?

She may well be - would you like her phone number?

[Windy]

I don't believe H-R are actually providing an option for the difference to be made apparent

So you don't think that you could , for example, put Windy's Lodges where it would otherwise say Mr & Mrs Windy then?

She may well be - would you like her phone number?

It would appear that it's avaiable on many if not most of the Western Lake District listings on H-R but thanks for the offer anyway

[greenbarn]

I don't believe H-R are actually providing an option for the difference to be made apparent

So you don't think that you could , for example, put Windy's Lodges where it would otherwise say Mr & Mrs Windy then?

A fair point! I think that adds to the misleading impression, but what really does it for me is the "Contact Owner" button, where in fact I'm going to contact the agency, and that's the bit that is within H-R's control.
You'd be perfectly within your rights to put Mr and Mrs Windy rather than Windy's Lodges; it wouldn't be misleading as I'd still be contacting the owner - you.

[Windy]

You'd be perfectly within your rights to put Mr and Mrs Windy rather than Windy's Lodges; it wouldn't be misleading as I'd still be contacting the owner - you.

Indeed but the same would not be true if ran an agency and the lodges were not mine would it?