British Telecommunications plc t/a BT 81 Newgate Street London EC1A 7AJ Number of complaints: 1

Date: 8 October 2008 Media: National press, Regional press Sector: Computers and telecommunications

Ad
A national and regional press ad, for BT Total Broadband, stated "Back to Back.  We've been named Best Performing Broadband, again.  For the second year in a row, an independent survey has named BT Total Broadband as the best performing ADSL provider.  To get the UK's most complete broadband package from only £8.95* a month for the first 6 months ... "  Text in the footnote stated " Epitiro benchmark performance of major UK ISPs 24/7 from Jan '06 to Jan '08.  For more info: www.epitiro.com ... *BT Home Hub 1.5 is free online only or £25 by telephone with Option 1 ... BT line or similar required ... New customers only ... "

Issue
Virgin Media (Virgin) challenged:  

1. whether the claim "Best Performing Broadband" and the reference in the footnote to the "performance of major UK ISPs" misleadingly implied that the ad referred to broadband providers in general, not just to ADSL providers.  They  believed the technical term "ADSL" was meaningless to the average consumer and pointed out that Virgin's performance as a major UK ISP of non-ADSL broadband had not been included in the survey, and

2. the ad's failure to include a prominent reference to the requirement to have a BT line or similar.

The CAP Code:

3.1;7.1;15.1;15.3;19.1

Response
1. British Telecommunications plc (BT) said they believed the claim "best performing ADSL provider" was acceptable, because it was factually correct.  They also argued that the term ADSL had been used since the launch of broadband and had been in the public domain for approximately six years.  Consequently, they felt that consumers were either aware of the term and its meanings, or had access to information on technical terms and would be able to find out the meaning of ADSL.  They pointed out that the inclusion of the acronym ADSL alongside the word "broadband" would allow consumers to understand that the claim related to a particular type of broadband.  They conceded, however, that the claim "Weve been named Best Performing Broadband, again" was ambiguous, because it had not been immediately qualified with "ADSL" and they promised to ensure that they would make clear that the claim was specific to ADSL broadband in future.

2.  BT said they believed that the ASA had previously concluded that consumers would understand that a phone line was required for broadband and that we therefore accepted that line rental requirements could be stated in the footnote, rather than the body copy.  They believed the only exception was where the phone line must be supplied by the same provider, but that would not have applied in this instance.

Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA acknowledged BTs arguments and noted that the Epitiro survey incorporated ADSL broadband services only and showed that BTs broadband was the best performing of the ADSL broadband providers used in the benchmarking tests from January 2006 to January 2008.  We noted the term ADSL had been in the public domain for six years.  Although we accepted that some readers would not be familiar with the term, we considered that most would understand ADSL to be a mode of broadband delivery.  We welcomed BTs assurance that they would amend future advertising so that claims were always immediately qualified by the term 'ADSL' if the claim was specific to ADSL.  Nevertheless, we considered that the headline claim "Weve been named Best Performing Broadband, again" did not make clear that the claim was specific to ADSL broadband.  We concluded that, without immediate qualification, the ad was likely to mislead.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 7.1 (Truthfulness) and 19.1 (Fair comparison) but did not breach 3.1 (Substantiation).

2.  Not Upheld
We noted Virgin Media were required to include details of the line rental within the body copy of their ads and, consequently, they believed BT and other providers would have to do likewise.  We also noted BT believed they did not have to, because consumers could choose a provider other than BT to supply their line rental, even if they subscribed to BT broadband.  We understood that Virgin Medias service was different in that consumers who subscribed to Virgin Media broadband packages were obliged to also take their phone line through Virgin Media, with the exception of Virgin's cable broadband-only customers.  We therefore considered that consumers taking out their broadband package through Virgin Media would always have to pay for line rental in addition to the price of their broadband and that this information needed to be included in the body copy.  However, because consumers taking BT broadband could choose another provider for their phone line, the price would not be fixed, because different providers offered different prices for their line rental.  We considered that consumers would be aware that a phone line was necessary to enable a broadband service, and it was not misleading to include this information in the footnote unless consumers had no choice over who provided their phone line.  We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead on this point.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation), 7.1 (Truthfulness), 15.1 and 15.3 (Prices) but did not find it in breach.

Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.  We told BT to ensure that future ads featuring a "Best Performing Broadband" type claim should be immediately qualified by the term 'ADSL', if the claim was specific to ADSL broadband.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)