ASA Adjudication on Haddon House

Ad

A national press ad, for cane furniture, showed a suite of cane furniture in a conservatory and claimed “50% Off in our Spring Sale”.

Issue

The complainant objected that the suite advertised was not in the "Spring Sale".  She also objected that the sale was ongoing and the 50% discount did not correspond to a reduction against retail prices.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

Haddon House (Haddon) explained that their advertised prices were 50% off the manufacturers recommended price (MRP) and said the complainant would have been told that.  They explained that their published price list showed that the "sale" prices were discounted significantly; they supplied examples of the selling price of similar, but not identical, cane suites from two well-known competitors.  They said that they were reviewing all their advertising material with their local Trading Standards department to ensure that their ads were clear.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA noted the information that Haddon had supplied and their comments.  We considered that, in the context of the whole ad, the claim "50% Off in our Spring Sale" implied that, for a limited period of time, Haddon's stock was being sold for half the price it was usually sold.  Because they had not demonstrated that their sale prices were genuine reductions from the usual selling price of their stock, we concluded that the ad was misleading.

The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 15.5 (Prices).

Action

We told Haddon House not to claim in future ads that they were offering their stock at a 'sale' price, unless they were able to show that that price differed from the one at which their products were normally sold.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)