Ad description
An ad on teletextholidays.co.uk, for a holiday by Broadway Travel, viewed on 15 March, featured text which stated "Ziteresa Sorrento, Neapolitan Riviera ... 7 nights Half Board departing 8th April 2012 £351pp Price correct as at 17.19 15/03/2012".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the price claim was misleading, because having attempted to take advantage of the offer, they were told that the holiday was not available at the advertised price and were offered the holiday at a price which was £100 more expensive.
Response
Broadway Travel said, on 16 March, Teletext requested evidence that the holiday was available at the advertised price. They provided the ASA with two screenshots which they provided to Teletext in support of the availability of the holiday at the advertised price. The first screenshot showed the flight prices on an airline's website. The second screenshot showed the hotel prices on a live booking engine which had a link to the hotel supplier through whom they booked the accommodation. They further said the prices were normally updated and checked every two hours.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted the advertised price was not identified as a "from" price. In that context, we considered consumers would expect the offer to be available at the advertised prices.
We understood that the prices were correct at the time shown in the ad and that the prices were normally updated and checked every two hours. However, we understood that availability fluctuated and that there would therefore be times when customers were not able to take up the advertised offer. We were concerned that the ad continued to appear in those circumstances. We therefore considered that the ad should have made clear that the advertised fare was extremely limited or could be withdrawn at any time, in order to make clear to consumers their prospects of being able to take up the offer.
We noted the screenshots post dated the ad and demonstrated that the offer was available for £352.79 per person. We were also concerned that the complainant had been unable to take advantage of the offer.
Because the ad did not make clear that the advertised fare was extremely limited or could be withdrawn at any time and, because we had not seen sufficient evidence to demonstrate the availability of the advertised prices at the time the ad appeared, we concluded that the ad was misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (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), 3.17 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) and 3.28 3.28 Marketing communications that quote a price for a featured product must state any reasonable grounds the marketer has for believing that it might not be able to supply the advertised (or an equivalent) product at the advertised price within a reasonable period and in reasonable quantities. In particular: (Availability).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Broadway Travel to ensure they made clear that offers were extremely limited, or could be withdrawn at any time, in future. We also told them to ensure they held sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the advertised prices were available to consumers at the time the ad appeared.
