Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A leaflet for Golf Fang, an indoor golf venue, seen in April 2026. The leaflet was in a yellow and black plastic wrapper. Text on the wrapper stated “PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE ENCLOSED” and “WARNING. It is an offence for any person other than the driver to remove this notice”.
The leaflet inside the wrapper included handwritten-style text that stated “MADE YOU LOOK!” across a Penalty charge Notice template. Further text stated “DO NOT WORRY YOUR PARKING IS SPOT ON” and “WE JUST WANTED YOUR ATTENTION... NOW THAT WE HAVE IT”.
Smaller text at the bottom stated “SORRY FOR THE SHOCK IF YOU WANT TO COMPLAIN VISIT: WWW.GOLFFANG.CO.UK TO BOOK IN AND COME TELL US IN PERSON”. The Golf Fang logo appeared in the bottom right corner.
Issue
The complainant, who found the ad on their car windscreen, challenged whether the ad was:
1. obviously identifiable as such; and
2. likely to cause unjustifiable distress
Response
Big Fang Collective t/a Golf Fang said the ad was part of a short promotional campaign that had now ended, and that they would not re-run the ad.
They acknowledged that the outer packaging, which referred to a “Penalty Charge Notice”, might not have been obviously identifiable as a marketing communication when initially viewed by consumers, although they said that would have become clear once opened. They explained that the packaging was a generic product sourced from a third-party supplier and had not been designed or modified to replicate any specific local authority or enforcement body. However, they accepted that the format, wording and placement might have led recipients to interpret it as an official document. They also highlighted that it had not been their intention to cause distress or alarm and acknowledged that some recipients might have felt initial concern on seeing the item.
Assessment
1. & 2. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must be obviously identifiable as such and must make clear their commercial intent, if that was not apparent from the context. It further stated that marketing communications must not cause fear or distress without justifiable reason; if it could be justified, the fear or distress should not be excessive. The Code also required marketers not to use a shocking claim or image merely to attract attention.
The ASA considered the text “PENALTY CHARGE NOTICE ENCLOSED” and “WARNING” on the wrapper implied that it contained a parking ticket. We considered that the appearance of the wrapper, which was yellow and black plastic, and its placement on a car windscreens further contributed to the overall impression that it was a parking ticket.
We acknowledged that the leaflet inside the wrapper featured the text ““DO NOT WORRY YOUR PARKING IS SPOT ON” and “WE JUST WANTED YOUR ATTENTION... NOW THAT WE HAVE IT”, and that, having seen that, most consumers would understand that the leaflet was a marketing communication. However, we considered that, from the outset, it was neither obviously recognisable as such, nor its commercial nature clear.
We considered that seeing something resembling a parking ticket on their car windscreen that would result in a fine would be likely to cause consumers immediate distress, particularly for vulnerable consumers, such as those facing financial difficulties, which was not justified. We also considered that the advertiser had acknowledged that in the leaflet itself with text such as “MADE YOU LOOK!”, “WE JUST WANTED YOUR ATTENTION... NOW THAT WE HAVE IT” and “SORRY FOR THE SHOCK”.
For those reasons, we considered the ad was not obviously identifiable as a marketing communication and did not make its commercial intent clear from the outset, and was likely to cause unjustified distress, we concluded that it breached the Code.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 2.1, 2.3 (Recognition of communications) and 4.2 (Harm and offence).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained about. We told Big Fang Collective t/a Golf Fang to ensure that all future marketing communications were obviously identifiable as such and made clear their financial intent. We also told them to ensure their future ads did not cause unjustified distress to consumers, for example by resembling parking tickets.
