ASA Adjudication on Jersey European Airways (UK) Ltd

Jersey European Airways (UK) Ltd t/a Flybe.com

Flybe
Jack Walker House
Exeter International Airport
EX5 2HL

Date:

7 February 2007

Media:

National press

Sector:

Holidays and travel

Number of complaints:

3

Complaint Ref:

14648

Ad

A national press ad, for flybe.com, was headed “Flybe. Low cost… but not at any cost! Serving the UK regions with low cost sustainable travel”. Further text stated “Flybe acknowledges that we have a responsibility for meeting the concerns of the regional and international communities by taking necessary actions in order to mitigate the effects of our activities on the environment Flybe has invested over $2 billion in the World’s most environmentally friendly aircraft, Flying high frequency services on the Bombardier Q400 aircraft that burns half the fuel of a 50 seat jet. A true 5 star Eco Aircraft … flybe.com The UK’s low fare, low emissions airline”.

Issue

Two complainants challenged whether the ad misleadingly implied that travel with Flybe was environmentally friendly.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

Flybe.com (Flybe) said the intention of the ad was to show that they did as much as they could to mitigate the effects of their activities on the environment by investing in environmentally friendly aircraft. They said the ad was also intended to show that Flybe cared about the communities in which they operated.

Flybe said the ad should have stated "one of the Worlds most environmentally friendly aircraft". They apologised that the ad had omitted the words "one of" and said they would ensure that the correct claim was stated in future.

Flybe provided statistics that showed how the two aircrafts in which they had recently invested, the Embraer 195 and the Q400, compared with other aircrafts on emissions, fuel burning and noise levels. Their statistics showed that the Q400 had 23-44% lower emissions, burned 12-33% less fuel and was four to five Effective Perceived Noise (EPN) decibels quieter than four other example aircrafts. Their statistics also showed that the Q400 was below the certified emissions levels set by the International Civil Aviation Authoritys Committee on Aviation Environment Protection.

Flybe said there was no standard definition of the term "environmentally friendly" and their use of that term had been to show that they did everything they could to limit the effects of their activity on the environment through the aircraft they operated. They said they had not intended for the ad to suggest that air travel had no impact on the environment and they believed consumers had enough awareness of environmental issues not to make that assumption. They said the use of the term "Carbon neutral" would suggest that their activities had no impact on the environment and they had not used that term in the ad.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted Flybe had intended to claim that the Q400 aircraft was "one of the Worlds most environmentally friendly aircraft" and we welcomed their assurance that future ads would include the words "one of".

We acknowledged that Flybes statistics had shown that the Q400 aircraft had lower emissions, fuel burn and noise levels than some other aircraft in the same category. We considered that most consumers were likely to interpret the "environmentally friendly" claim as a comparison with other aircrafts and we noted CAP Code clause 49.2 stated " Qualified claims and comparisons ... may be acceptable if marketers can substantiate that their product provides an overall improvement in environmental terms either against their competitors or their own previous products".

We considered that consumers were likely to understand that no airline could cause no environmental damage and were likely to judge the "sustainable travel", "low emissions" and "environmentally friendly" claims in the context of the overall impression of the ad, which was that Flybe used aircraft that were better in environmental terms than some other aircraft. We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead consumers about the environmental benefits of travel with Flybe.

We investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), and 49.1 and 49.2 (Environmental Claims) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action required.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)

Making a complaint

Find out what types of ads we deal with and how to make a complaint.

How to complain

Adjudications

View our latest weekly ASA adjudications or search for rulings from the last five years.

Adjudications

Non-compliant online advertisers

Check the list of non-compliant online advertisers.

Non-compliant online advertisers

Sign up

Sign up for adjudications alerts and newsletters.

Sign up

Already registered? Log in

Follow Us

For ASA news, including our weekly rulings, press releases, research and reports.
ASA_UK

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

We work hard to ensure our complaints procedures are transparent. Here we answer some commonly asked questions about how we handle complaints.

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd, Mid City Place, 71 High Holborn, London WC1V 6QT  |  Copyright © 2012 ASA