Ad description
On the website for Chess plc t/a Smartflush www.smartflush.com, the home page stated "Smartflush, the high tech passive infrared urinal control solution saves water with an efficiency that cannot be matched. Designed, manufactured, supplied, installed and maintained here in the UK. Smartflush only flushes on demand to maximise savings".
Under the "Savings" heading the ad showed a table to illustrate savings based on a comparison with uncontrolled usage.
Issue
The complainant, Cistermiser Ltd, challenged whether the savings calculated in the table were misleading, because it showed two flushes per hour for Smartflush, which appeared to be at odds with the technical specifications.
Response
Smartflush www.smartflush.com (Smartflush) said the comparison was against uncontrolled usage and was not intended to say that Smartflush would only ever flush twice per hour, but was an example based on the unit being triggered to flush twice, based on a 20-minute delay and a 10-minute fill time to flush the cistern once, which resulted in two flushes in one hour.
Assessment
Not upheld
The ASA noted that the table appeared on a page headed "Calculate Your Savings", with a subheading which stated "This example is for a typical urinal in the North West Water region". We understood that Cistermiser's concerns arose because Smartflush's system did not have a set number of flushes. However, we considered that the subheading "This example is for a typical urinal in the North West Water region", in conjunction with the figures that appeared in the table, explained sufficiently clearly that the comparison was based on uncontrolled usage against a Smartflush system which, in this case, was triggered to flush on average twice per hour taken over a ten-hour per day period, five days per week. Because of that, we concluded that the savings comparison was not misleading.
We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising), 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation), 3.11 3.11 Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product. (Exaggeration), 3.33 3.33 Marketing communications that include a comparison with an identifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer about either the advertised product or the competing product. (Comparisons with identifiable competitors) and 3.38 3.38 Marketing communications that include a comparison with an unidentifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer. The elements of the comparison must not be selected to give the marketer an unrepresentative advantage. (Other comparisons) but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action necessary.
