Cookies policy statement
We are using cookies on our site to provide you with the best user experience.
Disabling cookies may prevent our website from working efficiently. Click ok to remove this message (we will remember your choice).
OK

ASA Adjudication on Specsavers Optical Group Ltd

Specsavers Optical Group Ltd

La Villiaze
St Andrews
Guernsey
Channel Islands
GY6 8YP

Date:

25 March 2009

Media:

Leaflet

Sector:

Health and beauty

Number of complaints:

1

Complaint Ref:

74083

Ad

A leaflet, for Specsavers, stated “At Specsavers Opticians, our primary concern is the health of your eyes and the quality of the glasses that are dispensed for you. That is why we recommend that you have your eyes tested every two years, and, when you buy glasses from us, they are dispensed by our highly trained and qualified staff.”

Issue

The complainant objected that the claim "when you buy glasses from us, they are dispensed by our highly trained and qualified staff" was misleading because it gave the impression that all dispensing was carried out by qualified dispensing opticians, when in fact the majority were not.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

Specsavers said, since dispensing underwent partial deregulation in 1984, staff who dispensed glasses did not have to be qualified.  They explained that despite the deregulation, they still "highly trained" their staff, as stated in the leaflet.  They said  some staff, who carried out dispenses, were qualified either as Ophthalmic Opticians or as Dispensing Opticians (DOs).  They said they had on average two qualified DOs per store.  They therefore believed the claim was accurate.   They pointed out that they were the employer with the largest number of trainees working towards DO qualifications.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA understood from the General Optical Council (GOC) that it was not necessary to be a qualified DO to dispense glasses (except in exceptional cases such as for certain high-level prescriptions) and that a dispensing assistant without formal training would be able to do so.  We considered, however, that readers would understand from the claim "highly trained and qualified staff" that glasses would be dispensed by people who held a formal qualification as well as the appropriate training.  We concluded that the claim was likely to mislead.  

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

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)

Making a complaint

Find out what types of ads we deal with and how to make a complaint.

How to complain

Adjudications

View our latest weekly ASA adjudications or search for rulings from the last five years.

Adjudications

Non-compliant online advertisers

Check the list of non-compliant online advertisers.

Non-compliant online advertisers

Sign up

Sign up for adjudications alerts and newsletters.

Sign up

Already registered? Log in

Follow Us

For ASA news, including our weekly rulings, press releases, research and reports.
ASA_UK

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

We work hard to ensure our complaints procedures are transparent. Here we answer some commonly asked questions about how we handle complaints.

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd, Mid City Place, 71 High Holborn, London WC1V 6QT  |  Copyright © 2012 ASA