ASA Adjudication on East Coast Main Line Company Ltd
East Coast Main Line Company Ltd
Great Minster House
76 Marsham Street
London
SW1P 4DR
Date:
19 October 2011
Media:
Poster
Sector:
Holidays and travel
Number of complaints:
1
Agency:
Abbot Mead Vickers BBDO Ltd
Complaint Ref:
A11-164387
Ad
A poster ad, for train tickets, viewed in June 2011, showed an image of the Forth bridge with a sign that stated “LONDON EDINBURGH one-way from £16.50”.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the ad misleadingly implied the Forth Bridge could be seen on the advertised train journey from London to Edinburgh.
CAP Code (Edition 12)
Response
East Coast Main Line Company Ltd (East Coast) said the ad formed part of a campaign that was developed to welcome new customers to their brand and services. They said, for the ads that advertised a fare, the background imagery used a visual cue from the relevant destination; for example, the Tyne Bridge for Newcastle, The Shambles for York and the Southbank for London. They said the ad was displayed in London to encourage consumers to take advantage of a low fare to Edinburgh and the background image was intended only as a reminder of the destination. They said the ad did not claim the bridge could be seen during the journey itself and the image was not, for example, framed by a train window. They believed the ad did not misleadingly suggest the Forth Bridge could be seen from the train on the journey from London to Edinburgh.
Assessment
Not upheld
The ASA noted the ad promoted a train journey and included an image of the Forth Bridge, which could not be seen during the journey itself. We also noted however the message of the ad related to the price of the advertised tickets; it did not include any reference to the experience of the journey or to views that might be seen when travelling by train from London to Edinburgh. We considered the ad was likely be interpreted as suggesting the bridge was one of the attractions consumers might wish to visit if they travelled to Edinburgh, rather than that it could be seen from the train itself. We therefore concluded that the ad was not misleading.
We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 3.1 (Misleading advertising) but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
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
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.
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
