Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A leaflet for the roofing company RSL Roof Restorations, seen on 21 February 2017, which said "Important Notice - If you are retired/semi-retired or over 60 years old you may be eligible for financial assistance or a subsidy payment for roof protection or renewal" and "If your property is aged over 20 years you will be entitled to a FREE assessment of your roof. You must register your interest within the next five days".
Issue
The complainant, a local councillor, challenged whether:
1. the ad was obviously identifiable as a marketing communication and that its commercial intent was made clear; and
2. the claim that roofing subsidies were available was misleading.
Response
1. RSL Roof Restorations (RSL) said they had been operating for 26 years in the local area and delivered the leaflet to local post code areas. They said the context of the leaflet made it “obvious” that it was as a marketing communication, specifically that the style and wording of the ad made it clearly commercial copy. They drew attention to an 0800 telephone number and the name of the company (the latter included at the bottom of the leaflet) which they said clearly flagged the leaflet as an ad. They said they had sought advice from Trading Standards regarding the leaflet before publication in 2014.
2. RSL said that roofing subsidies were available in the form of VAT reductions provided by the government on energy-saving products. They said this deduction meant it was not misleading to describe the savings offered as a “subsidy”. In addition, they said they were able to offer additional discounts from manufacturers.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The CAP Code required advertisers to ensure that their marketing communications were obviously identifiable as such, and that they made clear their commercial intent, if that was not obvious from the context. In other words, they should be designed and presented in a way that made it clear they were ads for commercial companies.
The ASA understood RSL had at one time sought advice regarding their leaflet from
Trading Standards, although we had not seen that advice.
We noted there were elements of the ad that indicated it was a commercial message, and included an 0800 number and the name of the company, which was in smaller text than the rest of the leaflet and positioned at the bottom of the page. However, we considered the headline text “Important Notice” – in white text on a red background – had more in common with a warning or informative message than a commercial one.
Immediately below that red capitalised text, it said readers “may be eligible for financial assistance or a subsidy payment for roof protection or renewal”, but did not make clear that the leaflet was sent by a company offering those services. The next most prominent text was also capitalised and appeared in a black box in the centre of the page. It stated “You must register your interest within the next 5 days”. The final section of boxed text stated “If you meet the above criteria, please call … for your free assessment”. The leaflet was then signed by a person whose title was given as “Assessment Coordinator”. We considered that none of the most prominent information in the leaflet made clear it was an ad from a commercial company and that the prominence of that information was enough to distract from cues which would inform readers the leaflet was in fact an ad.
We therefore concluded that the leaflet was not obviously identifiable as a marketing
communication and that it did not make clear its commercial intent.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 2.1 2.1 Marketing communications must be obviously identifiable as such. and 2.3 2.3 Marketing communications must not falsely claim or imply that the marketer is acting as a consumer or for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession; marketing communications must make clear their commercial intent, if that is not obvious from the context. (Recognition of marketing communications).
2. Upheld
We acknowledged that the government provided VAT reductions on the cost of energysaving products and while those were not labelled as subsidies, it was recognisable as a saving made on a specific set of products, made possible by government policy. That included a reduction to a 5% VAT rate for “insulation on walls, floors, ceilings, lofts, etc”.
We considered it was reasonable in the context of the ad to describe that saving as a
subsidy. However, while such a saving may have been available for those products, it did not appear to be available for services advertised in the leaflet (roof repairs) and we therefore concluded that the claim “you may be eligible for … a subsidy payment for roof protection or renewal” was likely to mislead.
On this 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.
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).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told RSL Roof Restoration to ensure in future that their ads were obviously identifiable as such, that their commercial intent was made clear, and that they did not imply that subsidies were available for products or services to which they did not apply.
