Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
Four banner ads seen on www.betterbathrooms.com in April 2018:
a. A banner which included the text “APRIL SHOWERS UP TO 70% OFF* FINAL WEEK … + AN EXTRA 20% OFF** SELECTED CABINS AND ENCLOSURES … enter code CAB20 at checkout”.
b. A banner which included the text “APRIL SHOWERS UP TO 70% OFF* NOW ON … + AN EXTRA 20% OFF** SELECTED WALK-INS AND FURNITURE ... enter code APRIL20 at checkout”.
c. A banner which included the text “APRIL SHOWERS UP TO 70% OFF* NOW ON … + AN EXTRA 20% OFF** SHOWERS ... with code SHOWERS20 at checkout”.
d. A banner which included the text “APRIL SHOWERS UP TO 70% OFF* NOW ON … + AN EXTRA 20% OFF** QUADRANTS ... with code QUADS20 at checkout”.
Issue
The complainant, Victoria Plum Ltd, challenged whether:
1. the “April Showers” promotion in ads (a) and (b) was misleading as they understood that none of the “selected” products were available with an extra 20% off, and;
2. the “April Showers” promotion in ads (c) and (d) were misleading as they understood none of the products in the stated categories were available with an extra 20% off.
Response
1. & 2. Better Bathrooms (UK) Ltd said that in three out of four product categories the number of products that were on offer with the additional 20% off outweighed the number of products that were not. They said that for one of the product categories a significant proportion of products were available at 20% off.
They provided two spreadsheets which showed the products included in the April Showers promotion and the products included in the “20% off” promotion. They also provided a table with a breakdown of each product category in ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) which summarised the number of items on sale at “up to 70% off” and the number of items with 20% off.
They said that there were only a few products that did not have an additional 20% discount. They clarified that, with regards to ads (a) and (b), the banners stated that the additional offer was on “selected” products which they considered gave consumers an understanding of the offers available and ensured that they did not imply that the additional discount was on all items.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers would understand the claims “UP TO 70% OFF + AN ADDITIONAL 20% OFF SELECTED CABINS AND ENCLOSURES” in ad (a) and “UP TO 70% OFF + AN ADDITIONAL 20% OFF SELECTED WALK-INS AND FURNITURE” in ad (b) to mean that a significant proportion of their products would be available with a 70% discount across the selected categories and a further 20% discount would apply to selected items that were already discounted.
Better Bathrooms provided a table which set out the number of discounted items in the cabins and enclosures ranges referenced in ad (a) and the walk-ins and furniture ranges referenced in ad (b). It also set out the number of items which qualified for 20% off – however, these were marked as “non-sale items” by the advertiser. Due to the absence of any further clarification from Better Bathrooms, it was unclear whether the items referred to in that column were already discounted under ”up to 70% off” promotion or whether the 20% discount was only applied to items not included in that promotion. The number of items in the column titled “non-sale items (20% off qualified)” were higher than the number of items in the “sale” column for the walks-ins and furniture categories in ad (b). Better Bathrooms did not provide us with the pre-sale prices of each item as well as the amount that those items were discounted by. We further understood that the complainants were unable to purchase items in the sale with the additional 20% off discount when using the discount codes stated in the ad.
In the absence of any further clarification by Better Bathrooms, we considered that the information provided did not substantiate that the selected items which were included in the “up to 70% off” promotion were discounted by an additional 20% off. We therefore concluded that ads (a) and (b) were misleading.
On this point, ads (a) and (b) 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 3.22 3.22 Price claims such as "up to" and "from" must not exaggerate the availability or amount of benefits likely to be obtained by the consumer. (Prices).
2. Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers would understand that the claims “UP TO 70% OFF + AN ADDITIONAL 20% OFF SHOWERS” in ad (c) and “UP TO 70% OFF + AN ADDITIONAL 20% OFF QUADRANTS” in ad (d) to mean that to mean that a significant proportion of their showers and quadrants would be available with a 70% discount and a further 20% discount would apply to all the items in the referenced product categories that were already discounted.
From the evidence provided by the advertiser, we noted that there was a higher quantity of showers and quadrants in the column of the table headed “non-sale items (20% off qualified)” compared to the number of showers and quadrants in the “sale” column. We considered that it was unclear whether or not the items referred to in that column were already discounted under the “up to 70% off” promotion or whether the 20% discount was only applied to non-sale items. Better Bathrooms also did not set out the pre-sale prices of each item included in the promotion as well as the amount that those items were discounted by.
In the absence of any further clarification by Better Bathrooms, we considered that the information provided by the advertiser had not substantiated whether the selected items were included in the “up to 70% off” promotion were discounted by an additional 20% off. We therefore concluded that ads (c) and (d) were misleading.
On this point, ads (c) and (d) 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 3.22 3.22 Price claims such as "up to" and "from" must not exaggerate the availability or amount of benefits likely to be obtained by the consumer. (Prices).
Action
We told Better Bathrooms (UK) Ltd that when making “up to [X]% off” claims they should ensure that a significant proportion of sale items were discounted by the stated percentage and when offering an additional discount it was clear whether that applied to items within an ongoing promotion, and that such claims represented the true overall picture of the sale.
