ASA Adjudication on Money4Gold Inc

Ad

A TV ad for Money4Gold offered cash in return for jewellery. The ad showed a handful of gold jewellery alongside some £50 notes. Voice-over stated "Just this small amount could be worth the effort of turning your gold into money. That could be money you can use for a trip, a down payment on a car or a flat screen TV. Money4GoldUK is simple, fast and promises to pay more than other national advertisers. And if you find a higher price, we'll double it." On-screen text stated "Based on gold buyers with TV advertising & exact same metals ... Requires written quote within 30 days." Voice-over continued "... send your gold in the free, pre-paid and insured Royal Mail Special Delivery, Next Day envelope ... your gold goes to our refinery; there it's appraised and if you're not satisfied with the payment, your jewellery is returned, no questions asked. Within 24 hours we send you a cheque." On-screen text stated "Risk Free 100% Satisfaction Guarantee."

Issue

1. Three viewers challenged whether the image of the handful of gold jewellery alongside the £50 notes exaggerated the amount of money respondents could expect to be paid for their jewellery.

2. One viewer challenged whether the claim "Money4GoldUK ... promises to pay more than other national advertisers.  And if you find a higher price, we'll double it" was misleading and could be substantiated.

3. One viewer challenged whether the claim "Within 24 hours we send you a cheque" was misleading and could be substantiated.

BCAP TV Code

Response

1. Money4Gold said the jewellery shown in the ad comprised three rings, two chains, a brooch and two pairs of earrings which, based on June 2009 gold prices, would be valued at £1,201.73.  They said the ad showed £900 (18 x £50 notes).  They said it therefore did not exaggerate the amount respondents could expect to be paid for their jewellery.

Clearcast said the visuals were meant as an illustration of how money could be earned but that the ad made clear that the exact value would depend on Money4Gold's valuation.

2. Money4Gold supplied price comparison information taken from a competitor's website.  They believed the data showed Money4Gold had a higher pay out than similar mail-in national TV advertisers.  They said that, if a customer had received a written quote from another national gold buyer with TV advertising and mail-in service for the same precious metals the customer had submitted to Money4Gold, Money4Gold would double the amount stated on the quote.  The quote needed to be dated not earlier than 30 days before the Money4Gold payment; Money4Gold needed to be able to verify the quote and the quote needed to be on the same metals submitted to Money4Gold.

Clearcast endorsed Money4Gold's comments.

3. Money4Gold said items were delivered to them Mondays to Fridays, excluding national holidays and weekends.  They said packs were generally assessed on the day they were received.  If not, they were assessed within 24 hours of receipt unless the day of receipt was immediately prior to a holiday or weekend.  They said cheques were sent to customers within 24 hours of assessment.  They said that, if the 24-hour period extended into a weekend or holiday, the cheque was issued on the first business day following the holiday or weekend.  They said the 24-hour period did not include the time it took for the cheque to be delivered to the customer.

Clearcast said they had confirmed the 24 hour dispatch claim with Money4Gold.

Assessment

1. Not upheld

The ASA noted that Money4Gold would pay an amount calculated by weight for gold and jewellery respondents sent them but that the exact amount would vary according to the weight and quality (e.g. carat value of the gold) of the jewellery.  We considered the jewellery and money shown in the ad were, however, simply illustrative of the service, that they were unlikely to suggest to viewers that Money4Gold would pay a specific amount of money for a specific amount of jewellery and that they did not exaggerate the amount of money respondents could expect to be paid for their jewellery.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 5.1.1 (Misleading advertising) but did not find it in breach.

2. Not upheld

We noted that Money4Gold had supplied price comparison information taken from a competitor's website which showed that none of the companies that paid more by weight of gold than Money4Gold were national gold buyers with TV advertising.  We noted that that condition was stated in the TV ad.  We concluded that the data Money4Gold had supplied would not entitle them to make an unqualified claim that they paid more than other companies but that it did substantiate the claim made in the ad.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1.1 (Misleading advertising) and 5.2.1 (Evidence) but did not find it in breach.

3. Upheld

We noted that the 24-hour period did not include weekends, bank holidays or the time it took between a cheque leaving Money4Gold and being received by a customer.  We considered, however, that the claim suggested Money4Gold would dispatch a cheque within 24 hours of receiving a respondent's jewellery on a normal working day.  We noted from their explanation, however, that jewellery would be assessed within 24 hours of receipt if not on the day of receipt and then a cheque would be issued within 24 hours of the assessment - a longer period, therefore, than the 24 hours that was claimed in the ad.  Because of that, we concluded that the claim was misleading.

On this point, the ad breached CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rule 5.1.1 (Misleading advertising).

Action

The ad must not be broadcast again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)