Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A mailing, a leaflet and claims on www.corgihomeplan.co.uk, for a boiler maintenance plan called CORGI HomePlan:
a. The mailing included the CORGI logo in the top right-hand corner of the page. Text beneath the logo stated "Protecting homes since 1970". The ad also included a timeline which showed that CORGI was founded in 1970. The ad contained a summarised overview of the history of CORGI from 1968 to the present day beneath the sub-heading "Safety since 1968". Further text beneath the sub-heading "Recognised industry expertise" stated "With over 40 years [sic] experience providing professional services to industry as well as consumers; CORGI is a recognised industry leader in gas safety". Text beneath the sub-heading "Services you can trust" stated "CORGI has worked in partnership with trades people for over 40 years helping to raise standards in the industry and ensure homeowner safety and satisfaction. In January 2011 all this experience and expertise resulted in CORGI HomePlan being launched".
b. The leaflet, which was received with ad (a), featured text which stated "Protect your future with Corgi HomePlan At CORGI we are used to helping you look after your home and family. Our expertise in gas safety has been making the UK's homes safer for over 40 years. Who better then to help you make sure that your home is safe, comfortable and energy efficient". The ad also contained a comparison table, which identified "CORGI" as the company and "CORGI HomePlan" as the product they offered.
c. The website featured the CORGI logo in the banner beside the text "CORGI HomePlan". Further text stated "Call our UK call centre XXXX XXX XXXX". The footnote featured text which stated "CORGI HomePlan is part of the CORGI Services portfolio which, building on its gas safety heritage, provides a range of trusted, professional, quality services to the heating and plumbing industry. For the full range of CORGI services see: www.corgiservices.com© 2013 CORGI HomePlan Ltd ... The mark CORGI is a trade mark of CORGI Services Limited used under license. The mark CORGI HomePlan is a trade mark of CORGI HomePlan Ltd". The banner and footnote appeared on each page of the website.
The 'Comparison Chart' page contained a comparison table, which identified "CORGI" as the company and "CORGI HomePlan" as the product they offered.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether:
1. the use of the CORGI logo, in conjunction with the claim "Protecting homes since 1970", in ad (a), misleadingly implied that Corgi HomePlan Ltd had been operating as CORGI since 1970;
2. the reference to CORGI as the Company and CORGI HomePlan as the product in the comparison table, in ads (b) and (c), misleadingly implied that CORGI, who had been operating since 1970, were responsible for the advertised product, because Corgi HomePlan Ltd, who had been trading since 2011, were responsible for the advertised product; and
3. the use of the CORGI logo beside the text 'CORGI HomePlan', in ad (c), misleadingly implied that CORGI, who had been operating since 1970, were responsible for the advertised product, because Corgi HomePlan Ltd, who had been trading since 2011, were responsible for the advertised product.
Response
Corgi HomePlan Ltd (CHP) said no single legal entity had operated continuously as CORGI since 1970. Rather, they said various entities had operated under the CORGI brand since that time. CHP said they entered into a trade mark licence agreement with CORGI Services Ltd (CS) in 2012. They said the agreement permitted CHP to use the CORGI name and associated brands and domain names for trading purposes. CHP said they worked closely with CS to maintain and protect the distinctive nature of the recognised and trusted CORGI brand. They said the footnote on their website and printed material made clear that CHP was part of the CS portfolio.
1. CHP said it was correct that organisations representing the CORGI brand had been protecting homes since 1970. They said they were permitted by CS to use the statement "Protecting homes since 1970" with the CORGI logo in support of the gas safety heritage. CHP said they did not claim, either expressly or by implication that CHP had been trading as CORGI since 1970. They also pointed out that the ad explained gas safety history in the UK and made clear that CHP was launched in January 2011.
2. CHP said the comparison table included abbreviated names for the various companies and believed that was more informative to the public than including specific company names. They said that CORGI HomePlan and CORGI HomePlan Plus were the names of the products provided by CHP.
3. CHP said the use of the CORGI shield beside the text "CORGI HomePlan" was defined by CS as part of the brand guidelines and they must represent the branding in that style because it was a condition of the trade mark licence agreement. They also pointed out that the footnote on each page of the website made clear that CHP was part of the CS portfolio and aimed to maintain and protect the distinctive nature of the recognised and trusted CORGI brand.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA acknowledged the existence of a trade licence agreement between CHP and CS and that CHP were permitted by CS to use the claim "Protecting homes since 1970" in conjunction with the CORGI logo. We noted the claim and logo appeared in the top right-hand corner of the first page. We also noted the first page of the mailing provided details of what was covered by the product called CORGI HomePlan. The featured text stated "In the last year alone we've provided over 270,000 maintenance plans to Ideal boiler owners like you ... who better to look after your home than CORGI ..." and "It's time to switch to CORGI". In that context, we considered consumers would understand the ad to mean that the party responsible for the product called CORGI HomePlan had been operating as CORGI since 1970.
We acknowledged the footnote on the first page included CHP's trading address and the second page of the mailing explained gas safety history in the UK and made clear that CHP was launched in January 2011. However, we were concerned that that information was given less prominence than the claims on the first page and furthermore contradicted the impression given, namely that the party responsible for the product called CORGI HomePlan had been operating as CORGI since 1970.
On that basis, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead and therefore 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. (Misleading advertising) and 3.9 3.9 Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify. (Qualification).
2. Upheld
We noted the first page of the leaflet, ad (b), stated "Protecting homes since 1970" in conjunction with the CORGI shield and also featured text which stated "Protect your future, sleep safe trust CORGI ...". The second page of the leaflet featured text which stated "At CORGI we are used to helping you look after your home and family. Our expertise in gas safety has been making the UK's homes safer for over 40 years". In that context, we considered consumers would understand the reference to CORGI as the company in the comparison chart meant that the party responsible for the advertised product had been operating as CORGI, the recognised brand name of the former gas registrar, since its inception and not CHP, which was launched in 2011. For that reason, we were concerned that the ad was likely to mislead.
We noted ad (c) included the CORGI shield in the banner beside the text "CORGI HomePlan" and that the comparison chart referred to CORGI HomePlan as the product. In that context, we considered consumers would understand the reference to CORGI as the company in the comparison chart meant that the party responsible for the advertised product had been operating as CORGI, the recognised brand name of the former gas registrar, since its inception and not CHP, which was launched in 2011. Whilst we acknowledged that text at the foot of the page made clear that CHP was part of the CS portfolio, we were concerned that this information was given less prominence than the claims in the banner and comparison chart. Also this text contradicted the impression that the party responsible for the product called CORGI HomePlan had been operating as the well-known brand CORGI, since its inception. Because CHP was launched in 2011, we considered the ad was likely to mislead consumers.
On that basis, we concluded that ads (b) and (c) breached the Code.
On this point, ads (b) and (c) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. and (Misleading advertising), 3.9 3.9 Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify. (Qualification).
3. Upheld
We noted the website provided information about the CORGI HomePlan product and invited consumers to sign up for that service. We also noted each page of the website included the CORGI shield in the banner, beside the text "CORGI HomePlan" and that text at the foot of each page made clear that CHP was part of the CS portfolio. We considered, in the context of a website for the CORGI HomePlan product, consumers were likely to understand the reference to CORGI in the banner to mean that the party responsible for the advertised product had been operating as CORGI, the recognised brand name of the former gas registrar, since its inception and not CHP that was launched in 2011. Whilst we acknowledged that text at the foot of the page made clear that CHP was part of the CS portfolio, we were concerned that this information was less prominent than the banner and also contradicted the impression that the party responsible for the advertised product had been operating as the well-known brand CORGI for a number of years. Because CHP was launched in 2011, we considered the ad was likely to mislead consumers.
On that basis, we concluded that ad (c) 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. (Misleading advertising), and 3.9 3.9 Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify. (Qualification).
Action
The ads must not appear again in their current form. We told CORGI HomePlan Ltd to ensure ads did not imply that CORGI was responsible for CORGI HomePlan's products in future.
