收房在即，突然发现隔壁是工业污染地块，上海红盘业主起诉开发商！房企律师：没有披露义务，购房者系成年人，应自己调查

Core Viewpoint - The ongoing legal dispute between homeowners and Shanghai Pudong Huayuan Real Estate Development Co., Ltd. centers around the alleged failure to disclose environmental pollution risks associated with nearby land, which has led to significant financial claims from the homeowners [1][2][11]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The court hearing took place on September 10, where homeowner Zhou Li expressed dissatisfaction with the defense's argument that they had no obligation to disclose adverse factors outside the red line [1]. - The plaintiffs are seeking compensation for economic losses amounting to 612,863.3 yuan, while over 100 homeowners are considering similar legal actions, including claims for 10% of the total price of the affected properties [2][11]. - The case has been designated as a "demonstrative case," which will set a precedent for future similar lawsuits once a judgment is made [2]. Group 2: Environmental Concerns - Homeowners discovered that the nearby land contained 18 harmful chemical substances in the soil and 22 in the groundwater, raising concerns about the safety of the new residential properties [1][3]. - The original site of the pollution, the former Pudong Electroplating Factory, is adjacent to the residential developments, with the first phase of housing being less than 500 meters away from the contaminated site [5][8]. - Reports indicate that soil and groundwater contamination levels exceed acceptable human health standards, with specific pollutants identified [5][10]. Group 3: Disputes Over Evidence - The plaintiffs have submitted over 1,800 pages of evidence, while the defense has contested the relevance and purpose of this evidence, particularly regarding the environmental assessments [3][10]. - A key point of contention is whether the former electroplating factory should have been included in environmental assessments of the surrounding area, which could impact the legitimacy of the residential project [7][10]. - The defense argues that the plaintiffs had the responsibility to investigate potential environmental risks before purchasing the properties, emphasizing that the information was available through government channels [11][13]. Group 4: Misleading Information Claims - Homeowners allege that the developer misrepresented the nature of the adjacent land, indicating it was suitable for residential use, which they claim misled them during the purchasing process [16]. - The developer's representatives maintain that the land is designated for residential use after remediation, but homeowners argue that this was not clearly communicated at the time of sale [16][14]. - The ongoing legal battle reflects broader concerns about transparency and accountability in real estate transactions, particularly regarding environmental risks [14][17].