Borley Rectory's been thoroughly debunked by skeptics, and fair play to them - Harry Price wasn't perfect and some of the early reports were clearly embellished. But I think we've overcorrected, and now people dismiss the entire location as a hoax. That's sloppy thinking.
Here's what's interesting: multiple independent investigators, before Price got involved, documented unusual activity. The building had a documented history of strange experiences going back to when it was first built. Yes, some of the famous incidents were probably Price's own fabrication. But not everything.
I visited the site (or what's left of it) in 2019. The rectory itself burned down in 1939, so you're just looking at the foundations. But the energy of the place is genuinely odd. I'm not saying that's proof of anything - atmosphere and history can create psychological effects. But the location does something to you.
My point: Borley shouldn't be dismissed as completely fabricated. It should be investigated properly with current methods and skepticism about the historical claims. If paranormal activity is real, Borley's still worth studying. If it's not, we should understand why people found it compelling enough to report experiences there for decades.