Background
Summary of Council Decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
Two discount offers, on halfords.com, viewed on 28 December 2011:
a. A banner ad, on the website home page, stated "sale 40% OFF selected Carrera bikes". The ad included an image of a Carrera bike.
b. A product listing, for the VooDoo Bantu bike, stated "The VooDoo Bantu Mountain Bike is a great entry level MTB with 24 speed gearing and 120mm travel suspension for challenging rides. WAS £499.99 Save £150.99 £349". The text "£499.99" had a line through it.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether:
1. ad (a) was misleading, because the image was of a Carrera Kraken bike, which was not discounted by 40%; and
2. the claim "WAS £499.99" in ad (b) could be substantiated, because they understood that the advertiser had been selling the bike for £399.99 for a period of time prior to the start of the discount offer.
Response
1. Halfords confirmed the Carrera bike depicted in the banner ad was not one of the bikes that was discounted by 40%. However, they said the ad clearly stated that the offer was 40% off selected Carrera bikes, and the bike in the image was difficult to identify as no model or price details were given. They said the bike was for illustration purposes only and the full listings of Carrera bikes could be found on the website, with the 40% off.
2. Halfords said the price of £499 was charged for the Voodoo bike between 24 November and 24 December 2011 inclusive, and the discounted price of £349 was charged from 25 December 2011 until 30 January 2012.
Halfords confirmed the price of £399.99 had been charged for the bike prior to 24 November 2011, but said that, because the price of £499 had been established for 28 consecutive days before the bike went on sale, they had complied with the BIS (Department for Business, Innovation and Skills) Pricing Practices Guide.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA acknowledged the banner ad did not specifically state that the featured bike was available at 40% off, but rather stated "sale 40% OFF selected Carrera bikes". However, we considered consumers would expect the bike featured in the ad to be one of the selected bikes which was available at 40% off, and we noted the complainant had been able to identify that the 40% discount had not been applied to that bike. We concluded the ad was misleading.
On this point, ad (a) 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 3.17 3.17 Price statements must not mislead by omission, undue emphasis or distortion. They must relate to the product featured in the marketing communication. (Prices).
2. Upheld
We noted Halfords response. However, we noted they had not provided documentary evidence to substantiate that the bike had been sold at £499 prior to the start of the discount offer. Because we had not seen evidence to substantiate the claimed discount, we concluded the claim was misleading.
On this point, ad (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 3.17 3.17 Price statements must not mislead by omission, undue emphasis or distortion. They must relate to the product featured in the marketing communication. (Prices).
Action
Ads (a) and (b) must not appear again in their current forms. We told Halfords to ensure that their price claims related to the products featured in their marketing communications. We also told them they should not make discount claims unless they held documentary evidence to substantiate that the discounts were genuine.
