Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated, all were Upheld.
Ad description
A press ad and a website, www.consumerunitinstallers.co.uk, for an electrical company.
Ad (a) appeared in Saga Magazine and stated "Old fuse boards can Cause Fires & Electrical accidents can Kill You [sic] ... Every year Hundreds of Homes are fire damaged due to old Electrical Fuse Boards & Its [sic] estimated that 70 people die & a further 350,000 people are Seriously injured in Electrical accidents at home. By Changing your old Fuse Board to a new RCCD MCB could [sic] save your Life and your home."
Ad (b), a website for the same company, included the NICEIC logo alongside the text "Look for the symbol of safety". The bottom of each web page stated "All of our engineers are certified NIC - EIC [sic] & Elecsa or any of the following bodies shown above to ensure professional workmanship and assurance for our customers".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:
1. "Old fuse boards can Cause Fires & Electrical accidents can Kill You";
2. "Hundreds of Homes are fire damaged due to old Electrical Fuse Boards & Its estimated that 70 people die & a further 350,000 people are Seriously injured in Electrical accidents at home"; and
3. "All of our engineers are certified NIC - EIC & Elecsa."
Response
1 & 2. AG Ltd Group (AG) said the claims were taken from the Electrical Safety Council. The advertiser supplied a press cutting and a poster which included the text "An electrical accident can kill you ... Every year in the UK about 70 people die and 350,000 are seriously injured in electrical accidents at home”. They also supplied a document from 2004/05 related to home fires in English households.
3. AG did not respond on this point.
Saga Magazine told us that after they received a complaint about the ad it was no longer being published.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA took technical advice from an independent body who said the risk of fire from old fuse boards depended on how well they were maintained. An old fuse board that was properly maintained would not necessarily be a fire risk, but poorly fitted or poorly maintained fuse boards, whether old or new, could be a fire risk.
We acknowledged that some fires caused by faulty electrical devices could, in some instances, result in death. However, we noted the claim was presented in quite definitive language and focused on the worst case scenario of an electrical fire. We were also concerned that the ad was published in a magazine likely to include a readership potentially vulnerable to marketing communications that exaggerated the dangers of electrical installations. Because the claim was presented in a manner that exaggerated the dangers of electrical fires and due to its placement we concluded the ad was misleading and was likely to cause unnecessary fear and distress.
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
4.2
4.2
Marketing communications must not cause fear or distress without justifiable reason; if it can be justified, the fear or distress should not be excessive. Marketers must not use a shocking claim or image merely to attract attention.
(Harm and offence).
2. Upheld
We acknowledged the risks associated with electrical fires and that the advertiser had taken the figures from a secondary source. We pointed out to the advertiser that references from a similar ad would not be considered sufficient evidence to support claims unless they were supported by robust studies.
We also considered that because the overall impression of the ad focused on the dangers of old fuse boxes this implied that the number of deaths and injuries were related specifically to these electrical installations. We did not receive evidence that addressed this issue.
Because the advertiser did not provide robust evidence to support the claim, we concluded that it exaggerated the dangers of old fuse boards and 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).
3. Upheld
We were concerned that the advertiser was using the NICEIC and Elecsa endorsements to advertise their services without the necessary authorisation. Because we did not receive evidence that AG's engineers were certified with the two bodies we concluded the claim was misleading.
Investigated 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
3.50
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 in its current form. We told the advertiser to hold robust evidence for their claims and to avoid implying endorsement without the necessary authorisation.
