API for property showing mismatch value for price qualifier compared to what is published to portal

[adamjamesevans]

Client, White and Brooks, have stated that a single property (ID BRS230533) has a price qualifier of Price from however, when querying the API, the value is showing as "offersInRegion".

On portals, the same property is showing correctly as price from.

I have included a screengrab of the API return request.

Screenshots

Specification

• Project: Reapit.Services.Configuration
• Add new properties to PropertyTerminologyModel as below:
  • priceQualifiers -> Dictionary<string, string> which exposes the PriceQualifier enum names from the Properties API with the additional handling around the customisable aspect of the offersInRegionOf item (stored as uPriceQualOR in the database)
  • sellingStatuses -> Dictionary<string, string> which exposes the SellingStatus enum names from the Properties API, taking into account the following configuration settings:

• lettingStatuses -> Dictionary<string, string> which exposes the LettingStatus enum names from the Properties API

• The end result should look something like this:

{
    "properties": {
        "useSoldStc": true,
        "useMarketAppraisal": true,
        "priceQualifier": [
            {
                "offersInRegionOf": "Prices From"
            },
            {
                "poa": "Price on Application"
            }
        ],
        "sellingStatuses": [
            {
                "forSale": "For Sale"
            },
            {
                "forSaleUnavailable": "For Sale - Unavailable"
            }
        ],
        "lettingsStatuses": [
            {
                "arrangingTenancy": "Arranging Tenancy"
            },
            {
                "forSaleUnavailable": "For Sale - Unavailable"
            }
        ]
    }
}

• Project: Reapit.Services.Properties
• Update swagger documentation on the price qualifier, selling status and lettings status to either include a note about the configurable aspect of this (where applicable), or, if we map all status, to advise the developer to use a link in the links collection to understand the friendly status name
• Add link to _links collection terminology that links to GET /configuration/terminology

[github-actions[bot]]

Thank you for taking the time to report a bug. We prioritise bugs depending on the severity and implications, so please ensure that you have provided as much information as possible. If you haven’t already, it really helps us to investigate the bug you have reported if you provide ‘Steps to Replicate’ and any associated screenshots. Please ensure any personal information from the production database is obscured when submitting screenshots. This issue will be reviewed in our weekly refinement sessions and assigned to a specific project board. We may also update the ticket to request additional information, if required. For more information on our processes, please click here

[AshDeeming]

[plittlewood-rpt]

Hi @adamjamesevans this is happening because this custom has an override configuration in place that alters the "Offers in Region of" price qualifier text to "Prices From" - there is no easy approach to dealing with this and it's likely that we would need to expose something on the GET /configuration/terminology endpoint to help you to understand this programatically. We'll refine this in our next session later in the week, however for this customer you should map "offersInRegionOf" to "Prices From" for display on external websites. It's worth noting that it's likely that portals are displaying Price From due to the property specifying more than one unit/plot, which is the case with the property mentioned. You should see that PropertyModel.numberOfUnits is set to 5 for this property. This is what the feeds to places like Rightmove use to determine whether or not Price From should be used.

[github-actions[bot]]

This issue has been updated and moved to our ‘Near Term’ column (typically completed within 0 - 4 months). We have assessed the effort required and outlined a technical specification - please take the time to review this detail. When we're ready to schedule the issue, it will be assigned to the relevant board where you can continue to track its progress to completion. For more information on our processes, please click here