Purplebricks ‘proactively changes advert on Rightmove’ after watchdog ruling

Purplebricks has ‘erred on the side of caution’ and has changed its advert on Rightmove following the Advertising Standards Authority ruling that it must show that a fee is payable whether or not a property sells.

The ruling came after a complaint about the Purplebricks TV ‘commisery’ advertising campaign.

Those TV adverts had already been amended by the time the ruling was published, but the advert below could still be seen on Rightmove.

Rightmove would not comment to EYE, only referring us to Purplebricks itself.

There was then an unusual exchange on Twitter in which the ASA itself suggested it could take an interest.

EYE reader Malcolm Barnard started the discussion by asking Rightmove if it would seek changes to the Purplebricks advert.

Aspiring trade body CIELA – which had made the complaint which was upheld – said the Rightmove advert was not explicitly included in the ASA ruling, and that Rightmove “will have no grounds to demand changes”.

Barnard said that both publishers and advertisers have to follow the advertising code.

The ASA itself then jumped in, saying: “Our upheld rulings apply more widely than to the particular advertiser we investigated. And publishers have to follow our rulings too. Do you want to send us the details so we can assess if the findings of our previous ruling apply here?”

Barnard put up the advert on Twitter, to which the ASA responded by saying: “Thanks Malcolm. We’ll take a look.”

On Friday, a spokesperson for Purplebricks told EYE: “We have erred on the side of caution and proactively made the change to the adverts on Rightmove.”

 

x

Email the story to a friend

17 Comments

  1. Ric

    Headline needs sending to the ASA… (sorry EYE)

    “Proactively” would have been before ruling.

    Nothing more than they are being told to do, therefore “reactively” and definitely “reluctantly”

     

    Report
    1. AgencyInsider

      Oooh, you can’t say things like that Ric! You will incur the wrath of the dom & ducky duo – who no doubt will be along any minute now to wind up the assembled audience.

      Report
      1. Ric

        Any minute? being as “Local” as they are, I reckon another 45 minutes before they figure out where their office desk is.

        Either that or they will be busy trolling another industry website somewhere.

        Isn’t it Dick and Dom? 😉 **pending deletion**

        Report
        1. dompritch134

          Isn’t it Dick and Dom?  

           

          I’m glad you took up estate agency as your vocation, as humour is not really your thing.

          Report
          1. Ric

            I am funny Dom. Genuinely one of the funniest people I know and I know loads of people! xx

            Report
  2. MrLister

    EYE reader Malcolm Barnard started the discussion by asking Rightmove if it would seek changes to the Purplebricks advert.

    Another one that that just can’t resist giving the competition a knock. The campaign against PB is getting pathetic.

     

    Report
    1. Anonymous Coward

      @MrLister – so, please tell us what else we can do?

      We’re all ears…

      PB is misbehaving outrageously.   Like Uber, and others, they are persuading people with “Oooh Shiny!”.   In fact they are using “other people’s money” to support a business that certainly has potential, BUT they are not playing fair.

      Without wishing to get libellous – whilst typing that, the irony of my situation crashed in upon me… It seems that PB think that their “Comisery” adverts are fair, but I would call them libel. Bizarre!

      I wonder if that would be a way forward…?

      It’s such a shame that their isn’t an interest group or some kind of self regulatory body that might have been able to help.

      Sorry, who are the NAEA again?   I’m sure I’ve heard of them but didn’t they become irrelevant a few years back?

      Well aren’t we in a pretty pickle?

      Report
      1. hodge

        What about Arun saying best in class   was there a competition to prove that or is it a wild claim

        Report
        1. dompritch134

          Malcolm Bernard is another one whos social media feed is full of the anti PB rhetoric, you would think they may have more productive things to do?

          Report
          1. PeeBee

            Correction to the above statement

            “Malcolm Barnard is another one whosE Twitter feed is full of anti POOR ESTATE AGENCY PRACTICE rhetoric…”

            No need for thanks, dom-boy – we all know how grossly misinformed you can be…

            Report
          2. Malcolm Barnard

            Thank you for your comment Dom. What you see as ‘anti PB rhetoric’ others will see as ‘holding to account’.

            PIE readers please feel free to visit my Twitter page (@propertyecho) and judge for yourselves.

            Report
            1. dompritch134

              It’s a shame you are your colleagues don’t hold the same contempt to high street cartel arrangements.
              Or sole sellling rights agreements with elderly ladies being forced to stump up thousands, to sell to her son.
              But hey keep on the agenda 🙂

              Report
              1. Property Pundit

                Bore off Dom, you’ve used those lines before. They’ve been dealt with, move on.

                Report
                1. PeeBee

                  In fairness, Property Pundit, it’s usually his #fanboy rival, cyberthrush46 that labours those points.

                  dom-boy’s normal tactic is to ridicule the unTrustPilot reviews of anyone who dares to give his purple passion a bit of a batter on Tw@tter.

                  His own Tw@tter feed is now looking like a homage to all things #Purple – so he hardly has room to talk about the content of anyone else’s…

                  Report
                  1. Property Pundit

                    Well his #fanboy rival wrote the following on another forum just yesterday morning (try not to laugh too much):

                    ‘One traditional Agent who is very vocal in regard to PB is Chris Wood and I follow his tweets to see what he is saying.There was a tweet this morning https://twitter.com/PDQProperty where he’s claiming that the average listing price for a traditional agent is £300. I could be wrong but if that’s the case this is excellent news for PB. This would mean that for every 10 properties listed with a traditional agent the traditional Agent earns £3000 which if my understanding is correct means that they effectively sell only 1 in 10 of their listings as the average commission is somewhere around £3000.This can’t be right can it? Anybody see anything wrong with my thinking?’

                    You couldn’t make this stuff up, could you?

                     

                    Report
                    1. cyberduck46

                      PP, Clearly not brave enough to post your comments over on the other forum though. Feel safer over here among your friends? Typical bully.

                       

                       

                       

                       

                      Report
              2. Quags

                It’s quite staggering sometimes how blatent you are dom.  Maybe you should come with a disclaimer too.

                Report
X

You must be logged in to report this comment!

Leave a Reply