ASA Adjudication on Generating Leads Solutions Ltd

Ad

A text message stated "FREEMSG: Our records indicate you may be entitled to 3750 pounds for the Accident you had. To claim for free reply with AID to this msg. To opt out text STOP. From [sender's telephone number followed]."

Issue

A recipient, who had replied to the message and was subsequently contacted by an agent who said she was from GLS, which she said stood for Generating Leads Solutions, challenged whether:

1. the ad complied with the CAP Code because it was unsolicited; and

2. it was misleading and could be substantiated, because he had not had an accident.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. & 2. Generating Leads Solutions Ltd (GLS) said they did not themselves advertise as a company and did not engage in any outbound marketing activity.  They said they bought leads that were generated by enquiry aggregators or affiliates.  They said anyone who received a call from them would only have done so if the recipient had previously requested more information from one of GLS's affiliates or aggregators.  They said they had checked the complainant's contact details against their records and neither they nor any of their affiliates had any record of contacting the complainant's telephone number.  They said they had also checked the third party call centres they used to contact prospective claimants and none of them had any record of contacting the number.  They said they had also asked their solicitor panels if they had any notes or records of a claimant with that telephone number, but none had.

Assessment

1. & 2. Upheld

We noted that GLS, their facilitators, call centres and solicitor panels maintained they had no record of contacting the complainant.  We also noted, however, that the complainant had been contacted by someone who identified themselves as calling from GLS.  We were unable to explain the complainant's experience but noted that GLS said they bought leads from third party suppliers.  We were not aware of any reason why another company would identify themselves as GLS to a prospective customer or client.  We considered it was likely, therefore, that there was a link between GLS and the sender of the texts and that GLS were responsible for ensuring the leads they contacted had given their permission and had suffered an accident.  Because GLS could not demonstrate that the text was not unsolicited and that the recipient had had an accident, and because he had been contacted by someone who said they were from GLS, we concluded that the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 43.4(c) (Database practice).

Action

We told GLS to ensure that recipients had given their consent to be contacted and that they had suffered an accident, if the text suggested that was the case.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)