Background

Summary of Council decision

Two issues were investigated, both of which were Not upheld.

Ad description

a. A magazine ad for recline chairs and beds included the text "Quality Riser Recliners & Adjustable Beds. BUY ONE GET ONE FREE! * Family run business, Matching sofas and chairs, Exceptional comfort, Lifetime warrantee available, positional relief from Arthritic pain, many years of experience, Beds available in all sizes, Easy payment plans available. £250 PART EXCHANGE FOR YOUR EXISTING FURNTINUTE**". The first asterisk linked to text which stated "Mayfair and Queen Anne models only".

b. A brochure ad for recline chairs and beds included a logo and text which stated "BRITISH BUILT QUALITY ASSURED. Family run with over 30 years experience".

Issue

The complainant challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could substantiated:

1. "British Built", and

2. "BUY ONE GET ONE FREE" .

Response

1. They said that all of their products were manufactured and supplied by a select few British companies and that although they used some parts which were supplied from outside the UK, all assembly and construction was carried out in Britain by British companies. They supplied the brochures of the companies which manufactured the chairs which stated that they were 'British Built' (or similar). They also provided statements from their suppliers, which stated that the chairs they supplied to Westminster Recliners were built in British factories.

2. They said that as suppliers of bespoke furniture, it was difficult to offer accurate comparisons, but stated that there was a standard guide price which then allowed for alterations depending on size, styles, fabrics and extras. They supplied 24 invoices for similar orders for one chair, two chairs and three chairs which they believed could be used to demonstrate that the BOGOF offer was genuine.

Assessment

1. Not upheld

We considered that consumers would understand from the "British Built" claim that the chairs were constructed in Britain by British companies and that the fact some individual parts were manufactured outside the UK did not negate that understanding. We considered the correspondence supplied demonstrated that the companies that supplied the chairs to Westminster Recliners, built the chairs in Britain and therefore concluded that the "British Built" claim was not misleading.

On this point we investigated the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules  3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.    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),  3.7 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) but did not find it in breach.

2. Not upheld

We understood that each individual order was bespoke and that the price for an individual chair could differ significantly depending on a number of factors. We noted the example invoices provided by Westminster Recliners demonstrated that individual chairs (sold without any discount) were generally sold at around £5,000. We noted further invoices demonstrated that sets of two very similar chairs that were sold under the BOGOF offer were also sold at around £5,000. Because Westminster Recliners had demonstrated that two bespoke chairs were routinely sold at the same price as one bespoke chair under the advertised offer, we concluded that the BOGOF claim was not misleading.

On this point we investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules  3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.    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),  3.7 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) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1     3.17     3.3     3.7    


More on