Background

Summary of Council decision:

Five issues were investigated, of which all were upheld.

Ad description

The home page of a website, www.logodesignguarantee.co.uk, that offered logo and website design services stated "SALE Must End Midnight, Monday 30 Dec 2013 … FACT: By Far the Best Logo Offer You'll Find … HALF PRICE SALE!* On All Packages - Must End Midnight, Monday 30 Dec 13 …".

On a page headed "WEB DESIGN", text stated "One time Special Offer Must End Midnight, Mon Dec 30 2013. Celebrating our 1000th Customer … Half-Price on All Web Design Packages! Fact … Now The UK's Best Web Design Prices … Hosting Free, For Life!".

Issue

The complainant challenged whether:

1. the claim "FACT: By Far the Best Logo Offer You'll Find" was misleading and could be substantiated;

2. the claim "Fact … Now The UK's Best Web Design Prices" was misleading and could be substantiated;

3. the claim "Hosting Free, For Life!" was misleading and could be substantiated;

4. the 'Half Price' sales were genuine, because he did not believe that the services had previously been sold at the higher prices; and

5. the claims "Must End" and "One time special offer" were misleading, because the date changed every day, thereby extending the 'sale'.

Response

Logo Design Guarantee did not respond to our enquiries.

Assessment

The ASA was concerned by Logo Design Guarantee's lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code clause 1.7 (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.

1. Upheld

We considered that the basis of the claim "FACT: By Far the Best Logo Offer You'll Find" was unclear and noted that had not seen any evidence to support it. We therefore concluded that it was misleading.

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.    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  3.38 3.38 Marketing communications that include a comparison with an unidentifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer. The elements of the comparison must not be selected to give the marketer an unrepresentative advantage.  (Other comparisons).

2. Upheld

We noted that the basis of the 'best price' was not made clear in the ad and, as we had not seen any substantiation for the claim, we considered it was misleading.

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.    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),  3.38 3.38 Marketing communications that include a comparison with an unidentifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer. The elements of the comparison must not be selected to give the marketer an unrepresentative advantage.  (Other comparisons),  3.39 3.39 Marketing communications that include a price comparison must make the basis of the comparison clear.
CAP has published a Help Note on Retailers' Price Comparisons and a Help Note on Lowest Price Claims and Price Promises.
 and  3.40 3.40 Price comparisons must not mislead by falsely claiming a price advantage. Comparisons with a recommended retail prices (RRPs) are likely to mislead if the RRP differs significantly from the price at which the product or service is generally sold.  (Price comparisons).

3. Upheld

We noted that the ad did not make clear how the "Hosting Free, For Life!" was measured or enforced. Again, we noted that Logo Design Guarantee had not provided any clarification on this point and we concluded that the claim was misleading.

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.    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) 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).

4. Upheld

As we had not seen any evidence to prove that the packages in the half-price sale had ever been sold at a higher price than they were advertised for, we concluded that the claim was misleading.

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.    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),  3.39 3.39 Marketing communications that include a price comparison must make the basis of the comparison clear.
CAP has published a Help Note on Retailers' Price Comparisons and a Help Note on Lowest Price Claims and Price Promises.
 and  3.40 3.40 Price comparisons must not mislead by falsely claiming a price advantage. Comparisons with a recommended retail prices (RRPs) are likely to mislead if the RRP differs significantly from the price at which the product or service is generally sold.  (Price comparisons).

5. Upheld

We noted that the promotion appeared daily with a new closing date of that day, which created the impression that consumers needed to act on the day they saw the ad in order to take advantage of the offer. We considered that the claims "Must End" and "One time special offer" furthered that impression. We concluded that the promotion and the approach used were misleading and that Logo Design Guarantee should not have implied the offer would end imminently if that was not the case.

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.    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),  3.31 3.31 Marketing communications must not falsely claim that the marketer is about to cease trading or move premises. They must not falsely state that a product, or the terms on which it is offered, will be available only for a very limited time to deprive consumers of the time or opportunity to make an informed choice.  (Availability),  3.39 3.39 Marketing communications that include a price comparison must make the basis of the comparison clear.
CAP has published a Help Note on Retailers' Price Comparisons and a Help Note on Lowest Price Claims and Price Promises.
   3.40 3.40 Price comparisons must not mislead by falsely claiming a price advantage. Comparisons with a recommended retail prices (RRPs) are likely to mislead if the RRP differs significantly from the price at which the product or service is generally sold.  (Price comparisons) and 8.17.4e (Significant conditions for promotions).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We referred the matter to CAP's Compliance team.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1     3.3     3.31     3.38     3.39     3.40     3.7     8.17.4e    


More on