Ad description
A press ad for a Panasonic hearing instrument featured various images of the product. Text stated "Want to hear more, clearly ... but don't want to wear a hearing aid?... HALF PRICE OFFER. Reduced from £499. NOW ONLY £249... The Panasonic JZ Hearing Instrument. The revolutionary way to improve your hearing."
Issue
The complainant, who had been unable to purchase the device, challenged whether it was available.
Response
Hidden Hearing Ltd (Hidden Hearing) said it was clear from the complaint that some of their staff were lacking in knowledge, despite briefing materials having been distributed to them. They attached an e-mail sent on 25 May 2012 from their Product Manager that advised staff of the Panasonic JZ Hearing Instrument at the discounted price of £249. They said, going forwards, they would brief all their sales staff and Hearing Aid Audiologists and reiterate the availability of the product and how to replenish stock held at a specific branch.
They said the product was slow-moving and, because most of the hearing devices they sold were custom made and not "off the shelf" products, current stock levels were likely to last for several months. They submitted a Master Stock list that indicated that 61 items were held at local branches, three order confirmation forms which indicated that three items had been sold at the advertised price and a monthly stock report that related to the stock count of the product for July and August 2012. They also submitted another Master Stock list that related to another product which they said they had supplied for comparison. They said because most hearing aid instruments were custom made and, because they held over 300 different hearing aid products, it was not practicable or economical for them to have stocks of every device in every branch.
They said the advertised product used old hearing technology and that this was reflected in the price. They also said, according to their Hearing Aid Audiologist, the advertised device was not suitable for the complainant. They said hearing aids were prescribed products and the decision making process was guided by the expert and professional advice provided by the Hearing Aid Audiologist.
Assessment
Upheld
The ad stated "Want to hear more, clearly... but don't want to wear a hearing aid ... NOW ONLY £249 ... The Panasonic JZ Hearing Instrument. The revolutionary way to improve your hearing ... ". The ASA considered this implied that the product was generally available to purchase for £249. The ad also invited readers to telephone, or send their name and address to receive further information about the advertised product. We understood from the advertiser that consumers were required to attend a free consultation and that, only if the advertised product was deemed suitable for them and prescribed by a Hearing Aid Audiologist, were they able to purchase it. While the evidence supplied indicated that the product was in stock at the time the ad was published, the ad did not make clear that availability for purchase was conditional on a free consultation to determine suitability and only if prescribed by a Hearing Aid Audiologist. Because the ad did not make this clear, we concluded that it was misleading.
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
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising),
3.28
3.28
Marketing communications that quote a price for a featured product must state any reasonable grounds the marketer has for believing that it might not be able to supply the advertised (or an equivalent) product at the advertised price within a reasonable period and in reasonable quantities. In particular:
and
3.28.3
3.28.3
marketing communications must not mislead consumers by omitting restrictions on the availability of products; for example, geographical restrictions or age limits.
(Availability).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Hidden Hearing Ltd not to imply that their products were generally available if they were not. We also told them to make clear if the availability of their advertised products were conditional on a free consultation and/or a prescription.
