ASA Adjudication on Phoenix Structural Supplies Ltd

Ad

An ad, in Roofing, Cladding and Insulation magazine, stated “Phoenix Structural Supplies Ltd have developed a support bar system based on a stronger ‘C’ section. After stringent testing the system was found to compare very favourably against other systems available in the marketplace.”

Issue

Ash & Lacy Building systems objected that the claim "the system was found to compare very favourably against other systems" was inaccurate and misleading because their own product performed better in in-house tests.  They also challenged the claim "a stronger C section".

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

Phoenix Structural Supplies Ltd (Phoenix) said the tests on their GR8 Support Bar System were carried out by Ceram Building Technology (Ceram), an independent agency.  They said they had the GR8BAR system tested to the industry standard test, the MCRMA test, to which all support bar systems were tested.  They supplied a copy of the test, which constituted various loading and detachment tests on the brackets and the bars that made up support bar systems.    

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted Ash & Lacys tests were carried out at their own test centre rather than by an independent agency.  We considered that, to avoid possible bias, any tests that compared the two products should be carried out by an independent source.  We obtained a copy of the industry standard MCRMA test on Ash & Lacys Ashgrid support bar system, carried out by Ceram, which we compared with Phoenixs MCRMA test on the advertised GR8BAR system, which was also carried out by Ceram.

We obtained expert advice from Ceram as to the parts of the MCRMA test that best demonstrated favourable structural performance.  We understood that a high value for the positive load test was useful when a roof was loaded out under construction, and also when snow loaded the roof or when the wind put pressure on walls.  We compared the load tests onto bracket and onto bar mid-span for the two systems; we noted Phoenixs GR8BAR system had slightly lower values than Ash & Lacys Ashgrid for the load test onto bracket but had considerably higher values for the load test onto bar mid-span than Ashgrid.  We noted Cerams advice that the C section referred to the bar of the bar and bracket system.  We understood that the load test onto bar mid-span was the best measure of the strength of the C section.

We understood that the bracket detachment test could be regarded as an important test to demonstrate structural performance, because bracket detachment would be an issue due to wind suction throughout the life of the system and could generate the largest loads.  We noted the maximum load for Ashgrid was slightly higher than for the GR8BAR.   We also compared the sway load tests, which we understood were considered to be important measures of performance during the construction stage.  We noted the GR8BAR could bear a considerably higher load than could Ashgrid before the brackets bent or collapsed.  We understood that the test pushing across the bar and applying the load to the bracket would be important if an aluminium roof cover was used, and noted the GR8BAR results were substantially better than those for Ashgrid for that test.

We considered that the claim "the system was found to compare very favourably against other systems" did not imply that all aspects of the product would necessarily outperform rivals.  We acknowledged that Ashgrid outperformed GR8BAR in two tests but noted the differences in performance in those tests were only slight, and that in the three other tests GR8BAR was shown to be considerably stronger.  We considered Phoenix had demonstated favourable structural performance.  We also considered that Phoenix had substantiated the claim "stronger C section" because their product performed better in the load test onto the bar mid-span.  We concluded that the ad was not misleading.

We investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Fair comparison) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action required.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)