Ad description
Claims on www.wepark4u.co.uk, seen on 16 November 2016, stated "Southampton & Portsmouth Cruise ship & UK Airport Parking ... At WePark4u we provide a leading airport, cruise ship and port parking comparison site. We know all the best providers at all major UK air and seaports. This enables us to bring you the best airport and port parking deals on the web ... PARK MARK SAFER PARKING! The Park Mark® Safer Parking Award is given to parking facilities that have achieved the requirements of a risk assessment conducted by the Police and the British Parking Association. The Safer Parking Scheme is an initiative of the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), Police Scotland and the Police Service of Northern Ireland, aimed at reducing crime and fear of crime in parking areas". The Park Mark Safer Parking logo appeared next to the claim. The website featured a "GET A FREE BOOKING QUOTE" option that included a dropdown list of airports throughout the UK.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the inclusion of the Park Meter Safer Parking claims were misleading, because they understood that not all the car parks used by WePark4u were endorsed by the scheme.
Response
Hamble House Ltd t/a WePark4u said they used a car park in Southampton that had Park Mark accreditation and supplied a copy of the car park's certificate. They said their website did not state that all the car parks they used were covered; the ad simply explained the Park Mark scheme.
WePark4u said all their bookings in 2016 had been for the Southampton cruise port and therefore cars would have been parked in the Park Mark approved Southampton car park.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers would understand the references to the Park Mark Safer Parking scheme and inclusion of their logo to mean that WePark4u only used those car parks that had achieved the standards of the Safer Parking Scheme and therefore their vehicle would be parked in an approved safer area.
Although the ad highlighted the Southampton & Portsmouth cruise ports, it also offered the service throughout the UK and therefore we considered that the claims would be understood to apply to all car parks used by WePark4u and not just the one in Southampton. Because we understood that was not the case, we concluded the ad gave a misleading impression of the type of service WePark4u were able to offer consumers.
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 (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 3.50 3.50 Marketing communications must not display a trust mark, quality mark or equivalent without the necessary authorisation. Marketing communications must not claim that the marketer (or any other entity referred to), the marketing communication or the advertised product has been approved, endorsed or authorised by any public or other body if it has not or without complying with the terms of the approval, endorsement or authorisation. (Endorsements and testimonials).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Hamble House Ltd t/a WePark4u to ensure that their advertising made clear that the Park Mark Safer Parking scheme did not apply to all the car parks they used.
