ASA Adjudication on Local Contract Hire and Leasing Ltd

Ad

Three ads for car hire company 1car1.

1. One ad, on Yell.com, gave one of the company's branch addresses as London Rd, Romford, Essex and another as Edinburgh Way, Harlow, Essex. The ad stated "Car Hire From £99 Per Week ... Free Delivery & Collection".

2. A second ad, on ThomsonLocal.com, gave the same Romford and Harlow addresses and stated "Car and van rental with free delivery. All inclusive rates, no hidden extras. The price we quote is the price you pay".

3. A third ad, on ThomsonLocal.com, was headed "Car and van rental with free delivery". Below it stated "FREE DELIVERY. ALL INCLUSIVE RATES. NO HIDDEN EXTRAS ... Romford 01708 xxx xxx" London Road, Romford ...".

Issue

A customer believed the ads were misleading because he understood that:

1. 1car1 did not have branches at the Romford or Harlow addresses;

2.  1car1 did not operate from most of the addresses listed in the two directories; and

3. free delivery only applied if a car was hired for a minimum period of five days.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. 1car1 explained that they had intended to open branches at both the Romford and Harlow addresses but, because of problems with agreeing lease terms, they had had to change their plans.  They said they were too late to change their ads, because the directories had already gone to press.  They said there was no attempt to mislead and they had told Yell.com and ThomsonLocal not to reprint the addresses in the next edition.  They said the addresses had been removed from the online directories.  

2.  1car1 said they had undertaken a complete review of their listings and found some instances where inaccurate addresses had been included. They said the addresses were listed before they had acquired the properties because they felt sufficiently certain that the new branches would open, but their plans had subsequently changed.   They said, due to an oversight, the inaccurate addresses had remained in the listings. They believed customers had not been inconvenienced because they said they had other branches in all the areas where the wrong address had been listed.  They said customers did not normally visit their premises but contacted them by phone or on the internet and, because they offered a delivery service, a physical visit was unnecessary.  1car1 said, when they realised some of their listings contained inaccurate addresses they had the addresses removed.  They said they would continue to check their listings to avoid a similar problem in the future.

3. 1car1 said they offered free delivery to any location, irrespective of the duration of hire, although they did not hire for less than 24 hours.  They said, following receipt of the complaint, they had reminded staff of their company policy.   

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA acknowledged that the plans 1car1 had to operate from the premises in Romford and Harlow had changed, but we were concerned that the addresses were included in the listings prior to them acquiring the properties.  We understood that, because the directories had already gone to print, it was too late to change the hard copies but we considered that the addresses should have been removed from the online directories as soon as it became clear that 1car1 would be unable to operate from the properties.  We considered that, because the local addresses claimed 1car1 traded from the properties in Harlow and Romford, the ad was misleading.  

On this point the ads breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).  

2. Upheld

We were concerned to note that a number of the local addresses listed in the directories were not genuine 1car1 offices.  We acknowledged that, when they placed the ads, it was 1car1s intention to use the listed premises but we considered they should not have claimed that they operated from the addresses before they had the right to do so.   We welcomed 1car1s assurance that they would check their listings in future to avoid such errors happening again but we considered that, because they claimed local offices which did not exist, the ads were misleading.  

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 6.1 (Honesty) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).  

3. Not upheld

We noted from 1car1 rental agreements, which covered hire periods of less than five days, that customers did not seem to be charged a delivery fee.  In the circumstances, we considered that the claim did not mislead.     

On this point, we investigated the ads under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 6.1 (Honesty) and 7.1 (Truthfulness) but did not find them in breach.

Action

We told 1car1 to ensure that the addresses in their listing ads were genuine.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)