ASA Adjudication on MacAnthony Realty International SL

Ad

A national press ad for the Bulgarian Property Expo and a TV ad for the Overseas Property Expo. a. The press ad was headed "BULGARIAN PROPERTY EXPO". Below, text stated "The widest selection of properties. Seminars on how to buy, where to buy, what to buy. FREE independent advice ... London Olympia Fri 8th - Mon 11th Feb - 10am to 9pm. FREEPHONE 0800 xxx www.bulgarianpropertyexpo.com ..." b. The TV ad featured a number of shots of swimming pools, external and internal views of properties, beaches, and a golf course. The voice-over said " Are you one of the 2.2 million Brits planning to buy abroad? Well, the Overseas Property Expo at the NEC, Birmingham on Friday 4th to Monday 7th of January is a show not to be missed. It offers both emerging and established locations worldwide and there's properties too, on offer for a deposit of as little as £10,000. The Overseas Property Expo at the NEC, Birmingham on Friday 4th to Monday 7th of January. Admission free". Throughout the ad text on screen stated "UK Investment Property. NEC Birmingham Fri 4th - Mon 7th January. Overseas Property Expo". Changing text listed a number of locations and stated "Free investment and legal advice. Free admission".

Issue

A consumer believed both the press and TV ads implied that a number of companies would be taking part at the expos but, when she attended the events, she found they were for just one company and the legal and financial advice on offer was provided by their partner companies. She believed the ads gave a misleading impression of the events.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

BCAP TV Code

Response

Richmond Green Marketing (Richmond), on behalf of MacAnthony Realty International (MRI), said a number of companies were present at both the Bulgarian Property Expo and the Overseas Property Expo.  They sent letters from a number of companies confirming that they had taken part in the events.  They said there had been no claim in either ad that independent property companies of any type would be exhibiting at the event.

Clearcast said the TV ad (b) showed a number of properties from across the world, property interiors and shots of countryside, but they did not believe that this gave the impression that there would be a number of exhibitors at the Overseas Property Expo.  They said the ad did not include any branding or text to suggest how many companies would be present.  They said the voice-over simply listed the services offered at the Expo, along with the date and venue, and did not mention the presence of other companies.  Clearcast said the ad had not claimed that the legal and financial advice would be independent but only that it would be available and free. They pointed out that the event itself was free and that the Overseas Property Expo website made clear that only one company was in attendance.  They believed there had been no ambiguity to the services on offer.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA noted Richmond said other companies were present at both the Bulgarian Property Expo and the Overseas Property Expo but we also noted their assertion that the ads had not claimed independent companies would be exhibiting.  We considered that the letters provided confirmation of attendance at the event but did not prove those representatives had no commercial connection to MRI in terms of the products or services they offered at the event.  We considered the claim of free independent advice in press ad (a), underneath text that stated "The widest selection of properties. Seminars on how to buy, where to buy, what to buy" implied that the advice would be provided by a company, or companies, unconnected to the property exhibitors.  We also considered that the claim "FREE ENTRY To All Stands and Seminars" created the impression of an event with a number of independent participants.  Because MRI had been unable to prove the advice on offer at the event included advice about products or services unconnected to MRI, we concluded that the press ad could mislead.

We noted the TV ad (b) did not claim investment and legal advice would be provided independently, only that it was free.  We considered that, because the ad only listed the services on offer and the date and venue of the Overseas Property Expo, it did not give the impression that there would be more than one company exhibiting.  We concluded that the TV ad did not mislead.

The press ad (a) breached CAP Code clause 7.1 (Truthfulness).

We investigated the TV ad (b) under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 5.1 (Misleading advertising) but did not find it in breach.

Action

The press ad must not appear again in its current form.  We told MRI to ensure that future ads did not imply that independent advice or products and services unconnected to MRI were on offer at their Expos if that was not the case.

No further action necessary on the TV ad.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)