Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A website, www.nationwideplacements.co.uk, for Nationwide Placements (UK) Ltd, a recruitment agency, featured a web page titled “About Us” with the claim “Nationwide Placements are a UK leading generalist recruitment agency” and a logo for the Recruitment & Employment Confederation (REC) appeared at the bottom of the page.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether:
1. the claim “Nationwide Placements are a UK leading generalist recruitment agency” was misleading and could be substantiated; and
2. the use of the “REC” logo misleadingly implied that Nationwide Placements was a member, when they understood that was not the case.
Response
Nationwide Placements (UK) Ltd did not respond to our enquiries.
Assessment
The ASA was concerned by Nationwide Placements (UK) Ltd’s lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to provide a response to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.
1. Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers were likely to interpret the claim “a UK leading generalist recruitment agency” to mean that Nationwide Placements were among the market leaders in the recruitment industry and had recruited for a greater number of vacancies compared to other recruitment agencies in the UK. However, they did not provide any comparative data or substantiation to show that that this was the case. We therefore concluded that the claims had not been substantiated and were misleading.
On that point the ad 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 3.7 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)
2. Upheld
CAP Code rule 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. states that marketing communications must not claim that a marketer has been approved by any public or other body if they have not. We understood that Nationwide Placements did not appear on REC’s list of members and because we had not seen any evidence that they were members of the REC, the use of their logo was misleading.
On that point the ad 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 3.50 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 Nationwide Placements (UK) Ltd to ensure that they held robust substantiation for their claims and not to state that they were approved, endorsed or authorised by a public or other body, if that was not the case. We referred the matter to CAP’s Compliance team.
