ASA Adjudication on Redcats (Brands) Ltd

Ad

A direct mailing, which contained a brochure and an order form, was headed "We've got 150 iPod Classics to give away!" Text stated "This season's must-have accessory isn't a pair of shoes or even a bag - it's an Apple iPod Classic! ... And we've got 150 to give away for FREE! Hurry if you want an iPod Classic FREE worth £159! So drop everything, pick up the phone and call 0844 XXX XXXX quoting your special Order Code. If you're one of the first 150 people to call and place an order, one is yours absolutely FREE! …". Terms and conditions in a footnote on the attached order form stated "… 1. First 150 telephone orders received by La Redoute quoting Order Code on 0844 XXX XXXX will receive an iPod Classic. Winners will be notified at time of calling if they are a winner or not ... 4. In the unlikely event of the prize being unavailable, we reserve the right to substitute an alternative prize of equal or greater value. 5. Entrants must be existing customers ... and quote their Customer Reference Number and Special Order Code when placing their order ... between 29th August and 5th September."

Issue

The ASA received nine complaints from La Redoute customers, all of whom had received the mailing on 28 August and called on the same day to place an order and claim their free iPod.  Eight complainants were told they had won, only to subsequently be told that this was an error as the promotion did not start until 29 August.  One complainant was told that all the iPods had been given away days ago.

1.  All of the complainants challenged whether the promotion had been conducted fairly.

2.  Five complainants challenged whether the start date of the promotion had been given sufficient prominence.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1.  La Redoute explained that, although it stated in the terms and conditions that the offer would commence on 29 August and was limited to 150 free iPods, as a result of a systems error orders were taken a day early.  On 28 August, a number of customers in excess of the 150 limit called to take advantage of the offer and received confirmation that they were entitled to a free iPod.  Unfortunately, the error also enabled customers to place orders online using the "free iPod" order code, even though the offer should have been available by telephone only.

They said they became aware of the error mid way through the morning of 28 August and immediately set about identifying the nature and scale of the problem, including the identification of all customers affected.  By around noon on 28 August, they had briefed all call centre staff and ensured that no further orders were taken and on the same afternoon they tried to contact all customers who had placed an order using the "free iPod" code.  If they were unable to contact any customer by telephone after several attempts, a letter was issued to them early the following week.  

La Redoute said, in addition, they contacted their local Trading Standards (TS) office to explain the situation.  They said the view of their local TS was that La Redoute's approach had been fair and reasonable.  Customers who had been affected had the opportunity to cancel their orders, return items free of charge and offered compensation as a goodwill gesture.  

They said they were surprised to hear that one complainant claimed to have been informed that the supply of iPods had run out several days earlier and believed there had been a misunderstanding.  They confirmed, however, that they had supplied the free iPods in accordance with the terms and conditions of the promotion; no customers received an iPod outside of those terms and all of the free iPods were claimed by 8:20 am on 29 August.  

They stated that it was never their intention to encourage customers to call before the opening date, because that would lead to bad feeling and reputational damage as well as being potentially detrimental to business.  

2.  La Redoute explained that the opening date was stated in the terms and conditions, although with the benefit of hindsight, they believed it could have been given greater prominence for the avoidance of any doubt.  They confirmed that, if they ran another promotion where the opening date was significant, they would ensure it was given suitable prominence.

Assessment

1. & 2.  Upheld

The ASA understood that the complainants had received the mailing the day before the promotion began and had believed from the text "We've got 150 iPod Classics to give away! ... Hurry if you want an iPod Classic FREE ... So drop everything, pick up the phone ..." that they had to act immediately to qualify for the offer.  They, therefore, called to place an order as soon as they received the mailing.  At that point, they were advised that they had been successful and would receive an iPod and were very disappointed to find subsequently that they had not been successful after all and, in some cases, were notified of the error too late to apply for the offer when it officially opened.  

We understood that small print text in the footnote of the mailing, which was printed on a separate page from the introductory text, stated that the offer applied to the first 150 orders placed between 29 August and 5 September.  We noted, however, call centre staff had not been aware that the promotion did not begin until the following day and advised customers of their success incorrectly and, in addition, online orders placed on the morning the mailing was received qualified for the promotion in error.  We noted from La Redoute's response that the total number of customers inconvenienced was approximately 3,000.  

We considered that promoters should ensure that their promotions were conducted and administered fairly and under proper supervision so as to avoid causing unnecessary disappointment or giving consumers justifiable grounds for complaint.  We recognised that La Redoute had taken steps to resolve the matter as quickly as possible as soon as they became aware of the error, but considered that, unfortunately, the administration of the offer had not been satisfactory.       

We considered that information relating to the start date of the promotion was not given sufficient prominence in the context of the overall mailing and, furthermore, it contradicted rather than clarified the impression given by the text on the first page, which implied the necessity to act with urgency.  We welcomed La Redoute's intention to clarify the start date of future offers where it was a significant factor likely to influence consumers' understanding, but concluded that it had not been specified clearly on this occasion.

On both points, the mailing breached CAP Code clauses 7.1 (Truthfulness), 27.4 (Sales promotion rules), 31.1 (Sales promotion rules - administration), 34.1(a) and 34.1(b) (Sales promotion rules - significant conditions for promotions).

Action

The mailing must not be used again in its current form.  We told La Redoute to ensure that future offers were administered more efficiently to avoid causing unnecessary disappointment and to specify clearly any significant conditions likely to influence consumers' understanding of a promotion.  We advised them to seek a view from the CAP Copy Advice team before advertising future offers.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)