ASA Adjudication on Daimler Chrysler UK Ltd

Ad

A press ad for the Jeep 4x4 range. One half of the ad was headlined "4x4 OF THE YEAR" and pictured a jeep above the text "All New Jeep Patriot - Winner 4x4 of the Year". The other half of the ad was headlined "FROM THE GREEN 4x4 RANGE OF THE YEAR" and continued "Winner Green 4x4 range of the Year" followed by an award logo and the logo of '4x4 and MVP DRIVER' magazine. Beneath the text were images of four vehicles and a description of each range. One section stated "New Jeep Compass Stylish and well equipped, up to 43.5 mpg (combined)". A footnote stated "FUEL COMSUMPTION FIGURES FOR THE JEEP RANGE IN MPG: URBAN 34.0 - 13.0, EXTRA URBAN 52.3 - 22.0, COMBINED 43.5 - 17.7. CO2 EMISSIONS IN G/KM 177 - 381".

Issue

1. The complainants objected that the description of the Jeep 4x4 range as 'Green' was misleading because they understood that the range had high CO2 emissions compared with other cars. Several complainants pointed out that the highest figure of 381 g CO2/km was in VED band G.

2. Several of the complainants objected that the ad was misleading because it did not make sufficiently clear that the award was given by a 4x4 magazine.

3. One complainant objected that the ad was misleading, because it implied the whole Jeep Range had won an award whereas they believed it was only the Jeep Patriot that had won.

4. One complainant objected that the miles per gallon figure claimed for the Jeep Compass was misleading because the vehicle was more likely to be used in urban areas where performance was more limited.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Daimler Chrysler said the accolade was awarded to Jeep following the successful launch of the new Jeep Patriot and Compass models. They pointed out that both had highly competitive CO2 emissions and mpg figures when compared with other vehicles in the 4x4 sector.  Daimler Chrysler said 4x4 & MPV Driver was a respected magazine that reported on the 4x4 sector. Furthermore, they pointed out that they had introduced two vehicles with competitive fuel economy and emissions figures whereas most of their competitors offered only one.

2. Daimler Chrysler believed the ad gave sufficient prominence to the 4x4 & MPV Driver logo and pointed out that it was placed close to the headline.

3. Daimler Chrysler pointed out that they had been given two awards by 4x4 & MPV Driver. The first was 4x4 of the Year, awarded to the Jeep Patriot, and the second Green 4x4 Range of the Year awarded to the Jeep range. They believed the ad communicated clearly what the awards related to.

4. Daimler Chrysler said the complainant's point could be applied to almost any other model of car. They acknowledged that performance in an urban area suffered but maintained that the performance figures were all relative.

Assessment

1. Not upheld

The ASA noted the ad referred to two awards given by 4x4 & MPV Driver magazine. We noted one of the awards was for the Green 4x4 Range of the Year. We noted the 4x4 & MPV Driver logo was clearly displayed in relation to both awards and considered that readers were likely to understand that the awards had been granted by a specialist magazine. Although we noted the models featured in the ad were generally at the higher end of the CO2 emissions range, we considered that readers were likely to understand the claim in the context of an ad for 4x4s rather than cars in general.  Because the ad merely highlighted that the Jeep range had received a green award, we concluded that it was unlikely to mislead.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 48.6 (Motoring), 49.1 and 49.2 (Environmental claims) but did not find it in breach.

2. Not Upheld

We noted the ad featured the 4x4 & MPV Driver logo in close proximity to both award claims. We therefore considered that readers were unlikely to be confused by the identity of the magazine giving the awards. We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead.

On this point, we investigated under CAP Code clause 7.1 (Truthfulness) but did not find it in breach.

3. Not upheld

We noted Daimler Chrysler had received one award for the Jeep range and one for a particular model within that range. We noted the ad was divided into two sections one featuring the Jeep Patriot and the other the entire range. We considered that readers were likely to understand that the ad referred to two distinct awards. We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead.

On this point, we investigated under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness) but did not find it in breach.

4. Not upheld

We understood that car use in urban areas tended to reduce performance and fuel efficiency due to the slower and greater variation in speeds inherent to urban driving. We noted the ad gave prominence to the fuel efficiency figures of the Jeep Patriot and Compass models. Although we noted the complainants point that the figure of 43.5 mpg for the Jeep Compass was unlikely to be achieved in an urban environment, we considered that readers were likely to understand that the figure was intended to give an indication of general performance so that readers could make a comparison with other 4X4s. Furthermore, we considered that any issues related to urban performance were adequately qualified in the footnote, which gave a full breakdown of fuel efficiency in different driving environments. We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 48.6 (Motoring) and 49.1 (Environmental claims) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action required.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)