ASA Adjudication on Associated Newspapers Ltd

Ad

A front-page flash on the Daily Mail was headed "WORTH £25 FREE SPRING BULBS FOR EVERY READER". Smaller text stated "DETAILS: PAGE 50". Page 50 included a tear-off order form and stated "FREE SPRING BULBS WORTH MORE THAN £25 YOU PAY ONLY P&P ... TODAY, every reader can claim two super packs of FREE spring flowering bulbs. Choose from a pack of 25 large-flowered long-stemmed tulip bulbs or a mixed collection of 100 Cottage Garden Alliums ... All you need to do is send £3.99 for each of the packs you wish to claim, to cover the costs of p&p."

Issue

1. The complainant challenged whether the front-page flash was misleading, because it did not make clear that readers would have to pay postage and packaging costs.

2. The ASA challenged whether the claim "FREE SPRING BULBS" was misleading, because respondents were charged for packaging costs.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Associated Newspapers Ltd (the Daily Mail) said the front-page ad was not misleading. They said the CAP Help Note on front-page flashes did not state that they were required to mention that there were postage and packaging costs for redeeming the promotion.

2. The Daily Mail said the Advertising Codes stated that an offer could be described as free only if consumers paid no more than the minimum, unavoidable cost of responding to the promotion, and/or the true cost of freight or delivery.  Moreover, they said clause 32.5 of the ASA Code stated that they could charge for postage and packaging and the sum of £3.99 represented the true postage and packaging costs. They said those costs included the special breathable envelopes that ensured the bulbs did not die in transit, and the postage costs only. They said they were not charging for packing or administration costs in connection with the promotion.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted the Daily Mails comments.  However, we considered the cost of postage and packing was a significant condition that could affect a consumers decision to purchase the paper, and should therefore be stated on the cover.  Because it was not, we concluded the ad was misleading.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clauses 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness), 27.4 (Promotions), 32.5 (Free offers and free trials) and 36.1 (Front page flashes).

2. Upheld

We noted the CAP Code stated that promoters should not charge for packing. Because the Daily Mail charged respondents for packaging, we concluded the claim "FREE" was misleading and the ad was in breach of the Code.

On this point the ad breached CAP Code clause 32.5 (Free offers and free trials).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)