ASA Adjudication on Koulwick Ltd

Ad

A magazine ad for a company offering cosmetic surgery showed an image of a couple embracing on a beach. Text showed a list of cosmetic procedures and prices and stated "Free consultation with registered plastic surgeons".

Issue

A complainant challenged whether the ad was misleading because:

1. it did not make it clear that the quoted prices were "from" prices; and

2. it did not state that those prices related to procedures carried out in Cyprus and that procedures done in the UK were more expensive.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Koulwick Ltd t/a Burford Medical (Burford) said that all information about the surgery prices was made clear to potential customers when they contacted the company for more information. However, they said they would make it clear in future ads that the quoted prices were "from" prices.

2. Burford said the location of the surgery was irrelevant because patients would be aware that they would incur travel costs wherever the surgery was due to take place. They also reasoned that some travel within the UK could cost as much as travelling to Cyprus. They said most people held a valid passport and would not require a visa and so it was not necessary for the ad to state that the quoted prices related to procedures that would be carried out outside the UK.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted the ad did not state that the quoted prices were "from" prices and concluded that the omission of this information was likely to mislead. We welcomed Burfords suggestion that they would make changes to future ads to make this clear.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 7.1, 7.2 (Truthfulness) and 15.1 (Prices).

2. Upheld

We noted the ad did not state that the quoted prices related to surgery that would take place in Cyprus. We considered the requirement to travel abroad in order to take advantage of those prices to be a significant condition which should have been clarified in the ad. We also considered it to be significant that the same procedures in the UK would cost more than the prices quoted in the ad. We concluded that because this information was omitted, the ad was likely to mislead.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 7.1, 7.2 (Truthfulness) and 15.1 (Prices).

Action

The ad should not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)