Ad description
Claims on www.jean-patrique.co.uk promoted Jean Patrique Professional Cookware and featured a picture of a frying basket filled with chips, over a saucepan, with the text "PROFESSIONAL CHIP AND DEEP FRYING BASKET £12.95 was £39.95 save £27.00" The "SUMMARY" stated "Designed to fit into any 20cm saucepan, including the one from our 10-Pce Cookware Set, this heavy-duty mesh basket is ideal for deep frying the tastiest homemade chips, boiling eggs, or even steaming shellfish. The finely-woven mesh basket gently protects delicate foods when cooking, so you have perfect results every time".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the ad was misleading, because she had purchased the chip and deep frying basket on the understanding it was a Jean Patrique product, but received a Kitchen Craft alternative, which she understood retailed at a significantly lower price.
Response
Direct Response Fulfilment plc t/a Jean Patrique (Jean Patrique) said the product was never advertised as a Jean Patrique product, but was published on the Jean Patrique website, alongside a number of other products from different suppliers. They said the price of the product had always been clear on the website.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA acknowledged that the listing did not state that the product was a Jean Patrique product, but noted that it did not clarify which brand was being offered. We noted that the basket appeared on the Jean Patrique website and that the description stated "Designed to fit into any 20cm saucepan, including the one from our 10-Pce Cookware Set". We therefore considered that, because it appeared on the Jean Patrique website and because the ad stated that the basket could be used with "our" set, consumers would reasonably infer that it was part of that same set, namely the Jean Patrique collection.
We also noted we had not seen any evidence that the advertised basket had previously been sold at £39.95 and was therefore worth that amount. Because of that, and because we considered that the ad did not make sufficient clear that the advertised product was not a Jean Patrique product, we concluded that the claims were likely to mislead.
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).
Action
The claim must not appear again in its current form. We told the advertisers to ensure the product brand was sufficiently clear and that they held documentation in support of their pricing claims.
