ASA Adjudication on London & Continental Stations & Property Ltd

Ad

A poster and two e-mails for St. Pancras train station:

a. The poster stated "... meet me at the farmers' market. meet me at St. Pancras INTERNATIONAL ...".

b. The first e-mail stated "... Think of it as a perfect opportunity to get to know the station's other new residents - like ... the daily farmer's [sic] market ...".

c. The second e-mail stated "... With its wide range of shops ... and a daily farmers' market, St Pancras International will be a place to meet, eat, and shop till you drop ...".

Issue

Sustain challenged whether the claim "farmers' market" was misleading, because they believed the market at St. Pancras station did not meet the criteria for use of the term.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

London & Continental Stations & Property (LCSP) said they were responsible for the poster and Eurostar Group (Eurostar) were responsible for the e-mails. LCSP said they had looked at the National Farmers' Retail & Markets Association (FARMA) principles referred to by Sustain and noted FARMA operated a voluntary scheme and its criteria regulated only those markets which had applied for FARMA certification.  They argued that the poster did not give the impression that the market was regulated by FARMA and said they had no plans to apply for FARMA certification.  They pointed out that the FARMA website made clear that FARMA did not have any rights to the words "farmers market" and that anyone could use the term. They argued that the FARMA criteria did not therefore apply to the St Pancras market.

LCSP said they had used the term farmers' market to describe a market involving fresh produce sold directly by farmers and they believed that constituted a fair and honest use of the term.  They said the farmers' market at St. Pancras had not yet opened but they had been in contact with various market operators to identify a suitable operator for the facility; they said they intended to finalise the deal by March 2008. They asserted that, once the market was open, it was their intention that it would feature fresh meat, fish, dairy, fruit and vegetables, and not bought-in ingredients, sold by farmers rather than third-party retailers.

LCSP said the purpose of the poster was to excite interest in the opening of the new Eurostar terminal, St Pancras International.  They believed readers would understand the name farmers' market to mean a daily market which involved farmers and fresh produce.  They argued that the average consumer would not perceive a farmers' market according to the exact criteria set out by FARMA in its voluntary scheme.  LCSP also argued that readers of the poster would not necessarily expect the 'farmers' market' to be open on the first day St. Pancras International was open.

Eurostar confirmed they were responsible for the two e-mails. They said they were a tenant of LCSP at St.Pancras and the market was to be situated outside the Eurostar International Terminal. They asserted that the e-mails were intended to highlight the opening of Eurostar International Terminal at St.Pancras in November 2007; they said they had understood that the farmers market would be open on or after the opening of Eurostar International Terminal. Eurostar also pointed out that the FARMA criteria for farmers markets were not mandatory and the FARMA website made clear that anyone could use the term farmers market. They asserted that the e-mails did not give the impression that the market was a certified farmers market. They were assured by LCSP that the term farmers market would accurately describe the market once it was open.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA noted Sustain believed a farmers market should adhere to the criteria set out by FARMA. We noted, however, the FARMA website made clear that the term farmers market could be used by anyone and that it was not mandatory to sign up to their criteria. We considered that most readers were unlikely to be aware of the FARMA criteria for the term farmers market and would therefore not expect a farmers market to adhere to those criteria. We considered, however, that readers were likely to understand from the term farmers market', that there was a market at St.Pancras station that was run by farmers selling their own fresh produce direct to the public. We noted the market was not yet open and therefore exact details of the market were not yet known. We also noted LCSP had yet to agree a deal with an operator for the market. We considered that all three ads implied the market was open or would be open when St.Pancras station opened and reminded LCSP and Eurostar to ensure that consumers were not misled about the availability of the products or services they advertised. We considered that, if the market, when it opened, was run by farmers selling their own fresh produce direct to the public, the claim was likely to be acceptable. However, we concluded that, because LCSP could not confirm whether or not the market at St.Pancras would be run by farmers selling their own fresh produce direct to the public, it was misleading to use the term farmers market to describe the market at the time the ads appeared.

The ads breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

Action

We told LCSP and Eurostar to ensure ads did not imply a market was either currently or imminently in operation and run by farmers selling fresh produce if they could not demonstrate that.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)