Are there any controls on the use of flowery language by agents, wonders Edel Morgan

A few weeks ago I went to see a house in Dublin 3 described as "beautifully presented" in the sales brochure which I, strangely enough, took to mean it would be presented beautifully. While I wasn't expecting the décor to be to my taste, I thought I would find a house with a near flawless finish that has been treated to a regular lick of paint and spit of polish and where thought and care had gone into each room - earning it the "beautifully presented" tag as opposed to the more vague "well" or "imaginatively" presented.

Instead, I found a house that needed at least €50,000 of work to bring it up to modern standards with a lingering, stale odour, a dark and outdated kitchen, a "granny flat" that would in estate agent speak would "benefit from" a bulldozer, and fitted wardrobes that I have traced back to Noah's Ark. So why didn't the agent tone the description down? Or mention discretely somewhere that a new owner might choose to update the property? And do I have any comeback against the agent for wasting my time by luring me to view a property through false advertising?

According to Alan Cooke, chief executive officer of the IAVI, the words "beautifully presented" are regarded as subjective. "The courts have recognised that estate agents are allowed a degree of latitude to achieve their contractual duty. Subjective issues include the standard of the property or its décor, the quality of views available to it, etc - each person's opinion of them is personal," he said

So, if an agent refers to a tired old property as "truly stunning", is it because he or she believes it to be so? Not exactly. According to a solicitor I spoke to, it is accepted that estate agents have to give "the best side of the story. Where the language refers to a sun-drenched garden, people have to understand there is an element of puff," he said.

All very well but isn't there a difference between a positive spin and complete fabrication? I went through online sales brochures and found quite a few that made the cross-over into fiction writing. A city centre flat described as "immaculately presented" had pictures showing a sad-looking livingroom with a few dated sticks of brown furniture. A "meticulously" presented house in Artane is apparently "close to every imaginable amenity". I live in the area and I've yet to find an ice rink or Disney theme park within walking distance.

The prize for flowery language goes to the agent who describes a perfectly nice one-bed apartment in Inchicore as "the ultimate in city living seldom does a property with a real sense of style, flair and panache come to the market but the owner has merged these traits to come up with a winning combination" it gushes.

Another describes an ultra modern two-bed apartment in Dublin 8 as "fit for royalty" overlooking "majestic swans" on the "scenic" canal. It came as a relief to know that if the Queen Elizabeth ever decides to relocate to an apartment off Harold's Cross bridge that she will be well sorted for accommodation.

The danger is that, like the boy who cried wolf, when terms like "stunning" and "superb" are used for properties that don't live up to the hype, it leaves us less inclined to believe when a genuinely stunning one comes up. Would it be a leap to use words like "functional" or "standard" when that is often what house hunters are looking for - an ordinary house within their price range that they can make their own.

When I asked Alan Cooke for the IAVI's standpoint on the use of superlatives, he said "astute agents" are aware that over-hyping can easily be counter-productive "as the prospective buyer, when presented with the reality that is the property, may be so disappointed that it fails to live up to the flowery description, that they simply lose interest".

An estate agent is only considered to be telling a blatant lie if they misrepresent what are regarded as objective issues.

According to Alan Cooke: "This differentiation was noted by the review group that examined the auctioneering profession, which recommended that the regulatory authority should sanction licence holders who exhibit a pattern of providing factually inaccurate particulars, for example measurements, property orientation, distance from nearest school, average commuting times, etc." At present, IAVI members faces a possible fine of up to €20,000 if sanctioned.

There is currently no onus on an estate agent or vendor to volunteer information to a buyer that a block of flats is planned over the back wall or a factory is to be built across the road. "It is really a case of buyer beware and it is up to them to make the proper enquiries which may involve looking at the development plan," said the solicitor.