ASA Adjudication on Stripestar Ltd

Ad

A local press ad for a car dealership was headlined "FEBRUARY FRENZY" and text stated “OFFERS APPLY TO VEHICLES REGISTERED UP TO AND INCLUDING 28TH FEBRUARY 2009”. There were photos and details of three discounted cars; a Ford Focus 1.8 Zetec was pictured and text stated “SAVE 28% Now Only £11991”. The specs were given and text said “LIST PRICE £16595”. Further bold text stated “PRICE PROMISE” next to a price guarantee symbol. The terms were shown in small print at the bottom of the ad, with the contact details.

Issue

The complainant objected that the ad was misleading because he believed the advertisers could not meet the demand for the offer.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

Stripestar Ltd (Stripestar) provided details of the number of Ford Focus vehicles a Ford main retailer would be expected to sell to retail customers in an average February, along with the number of dealerships and the anticipated demand for February.  They provided documentation showing they had hundreds of Focus vehicles in stock at their dealership at the end of January, which was considerably higher than the number they anticipated selling in an average February.  They said if additional stock was required, it was normal to obtain it from the Ford dealer network or the manufacturer.  They said that, in early February, a major vehicle rental company approached the manufacturer for a significant fleet of vehicles and several hundred Focuses were supplied, some via Stripestar.  They maintained they could not have reasonably expected such a large order to occur at that time.  They said the order was received by their corporate department in late January and early February. However, it always took time to agree the specifics of a particular corporate order.  The retail department would therefore not have become immediately aware of the details of the order until later in the month.  They said the large corporate order had affected the pool of available vehicles and that the discount and the campaign were not continued beyond February.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted that Stripestar had based the expected demand on their previous average retail sales for February and that they had provided documentary evidence showing there was more than enough stock to cover the expected demand and that there were provisions in place to obtain additional stock from other sources if necessary.  We noted that during the promotional month (February 2009), a corporate customer had ordered a large number of vehicles from the manufacturer and that Stripestar then supplied vehicles to meet that order.  We acknowledged that an order of that size was uncommon and would have been difficult to anticipate.  Although we acknowledged that towards the end of the promotional period, at least one retail customer was unable to purchase a Focus from Stripestar, we considered that that was due to the unforeseen demand from a large corporate order and concluded that Stripestar had demonstrated that they had sufficient stock in place to cover the expected demand for an average February and had taken sufficient steps to ensure there was adequate availability for the promotion under normal circumstances.

Investigated under CAP Code clauses 7.1 (Truthfulness), 16.4 (Availability of prices), 27.4 (Sales promotions) and 30.1 (Availability).

Action

No further action necessary.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)