Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
Two banner ads and claims on www.magpas.org.uk, for a charity providing ambulance services, viewed in February 2012:
a. The first banner ad, displayed in various locations, including at an Asda store in Ipswich, featured text which stated "SAVING LIVES DAY & NIGHT" and "Your Day Time Air Ambulance". The ad included the logo of Magpas.
b. The second banner ad, also displayed in various locations, including at an Asda store in Ipswich, stated "SAVING LIVES NIGHT & DAY" and "Your Night Time Air Ambulance Service". The ad also included the logo of Magpas.
c. The website, featured text on the 'Operational Statistics' page which stated "Magpas Helimedix - Saving lives ... Anyone, anywhere, anytime!". Further text stated "Due to our unique partnership with Cambridgeshire Police we offer Pre-Hospital Critical Care to anywhere within the East of England". A map of the east of England appeared beside that text. Further text stated "Helmedix teams are able to attend medical emergencies on three dedicated transport platforms including Air Ambulance, Rapid Response Vehicle and Police Helicopter ... The aim of Magpas Helimedix is to provide the country's first CAA approved 24/7 Emergency Medical service, delivering Doctors on Helicopters, to any serious incident within the East of England, we have the capability but require the funding to support this ... ".
Text on the 'Activations and Costs' page stated "From our base in Huntingdonshire we are able to respond rapidly to any medical emergency in the region ... By helicopter we can get to virtually anywhere in the East of England within 30 minutes! When patients are critically injured and trapped these quick response times can make all the difference".
Issue
1. East Anglian Air Ambulance (EAAA) challenged whether the references to “your air ambulance service”, in ads (a) and (b) were misleading, because they understood the areas and times in which Magpas operated was limited and they were not the primary air ambulance service for some of the places in which the banners were used.
EAAA also challenged whether the following claims, in ad (c), were misleading and could be substantiated:
2. "Magpas Helimedix - Saving lives ... Anyone, anywhere, anytime!", because they understood the Magpas service only operated at certain times and was subject to limited availability of the Police helicopter; and
3. "By helicopter we can get to virtually anywhere in the East of England within 30 minutes!"
Response
1. Magpas said at the time the ad appeared they worked jointly with Cambridge Constabulary Air Operations unit to provide the UK's only night time Air Ambulance. They said that due to Civilian Aviation Authority restrictions civilian aircraft could not fly at night. They said that between 01:00 and 07:00 Magpas had two dedicated rapid response vehicles and one land Ambulance available to them and that between 07:00 and 01:00 Magpas could deploy their medical team by helicopter. They also said that the RAF Search and Rescue helicopter could be called upon by one of the statutory 999 services to carry the Magpas team.
Magpas provided a document from the East of England Ambulance Service NHS Trust (EEAST) which made clear that Magpas could be deployed in support of the emergency services across the East of England, where specifically requested.
2. Magpas provided their own data which showed a breakdown of the incidents attended by Magpas according to their Primary Care Trust (PCT). They said there were 13 PCTs in the East of England and the data showed they had attended patients in all of them. They also provided evidence from EEAST, which they argued demonstrated that their air ambulance had attended incidents in the East of England.
3. Magpas provided their own data of flight times for deployments. They said the flight times were within or close to 30 minutes and therefore believed the claim had been substantiated.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA considered consumers were likely to interpret the references to "your air ambulance" to mean that the air ambulance was readily available in the locations in which the ads appeared. We noted Magpas provided a document from EEAST which made clear that they could be deployed in support of the emergency services across the East of England, where specifically requested. However, we were concerned that Magpas could not deploy an air ambulance between the hours of 01:00 and 07:00 and that, according to their own Governance report, the helicopter had only been available for 63.5% of shifts between January and September 2011.
Because the availability of the air ambulance was limited, we concluded that the references to "your air ambulance" were likely to mislead.
On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
3.3
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising) and
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).
2. Upheld
We noted text beneath the claim stated "we offer Pre-Hospital Critical Care to anywhere within the East of England" and that a map of the East of England was shown beside that claim. We also noted the ad referred to Magpas Helmedix and made clear that their aim was to provide a 24/7 Emergency Medical service, which delivered Doctors on helicopters, to any serious incident within the East of England. In that context, we considered consumers were likely to understand the claim to mean that, Magpas could provide an air ambulance service to any individual, in any of the locations referred to in the map, at anytime.
We noted the evidence from EEAST related to incidents attended since January 2012 and that the ad was viewed in February 2012. We were therefore concerned that evidence which related to a single month was not sufficient to demonstrate that, at the time of the ad, Magpas had attended incidents in the locations referred to in the map. We were also concerned that the evidence which pre dated the ad did not show that Magpas had attended incidents in all locations referred to in the map. Furthermore, as referred to in Point 1, we were concerned that the availability of the aircraft was limited, by hours of operation and the percentage of shifts for which the aircraft was available.
Because we had not seen evidence to demonstrate that Magpas Helimedix provided assistance in all of the locations referred to in the map and because the availability of the aircraft was limited, we concluded that the claim was misleading and breached the Code.
On this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
3.3
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising) and
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. Upheld
We noted the ad made clear that due to their central location Magpas were able to respond rapidly to any medical emergency in the region and that when patients were critically injured the quick response times could make all the difference. In conjunction with the fact the ad was for an ambulance service, we considered consumers were likely to interpret the claim to mean that a member of their team could be with patients, in the vast majority of areas within the East of England, within 30 minutes of them making a call. We were therefore concerned that their own data of flight times for deployments was not sufficient to demonstrate that. On that basis, we considered the claim had not been substantiated and concluded that it was misleading.
On this point, the ad breached 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) and 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Exaggeration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Magpas to ensure they hold robust substantiation to support claims in future.
