A prize draw run by the car dealership, Hendy, seen in August 2017 on their Facebook page, included text which stated “We’re giving one lucky individual the chance to win an All-New Ford Fiesta in our #BIGFiestaGiveaway!...Find out more…T&Cs apply”. The terms of the competition on their website included text which stated “The competition is run by Hendy Group Limited. This BIG Fiesta Giveaway competition is free to enter, no purchase is necessary and it is open to residents of the UK aged 18 and over, other than Hendy employees, their families and anyone else professionally associated with the prize draw…”
Four complainants, who believed the winner of the prize draw did not fulfil the requirements to qualify to be an entrant for the competition because the winner was a relative of an employee, challenged whether the competition was administered in accordance with the CAP Code.
Hendy Group Ltd t/a Hendy Group provided a list of relatives who would be excluded from the draw and explained how the promotion was conducted step-by-step. They said they downloaded all leads from the Facebook lead generation form created especially for the #BIGFiestaGiveaway. They then entered the data anonymously and using a free third-party online random number generator called ‘Random.ORG’ which offered true random numbers to anyone on the internet, to randomise the draw and selecte a winner. The winner’s details were provided to the Hendy Group Marketing team to confirm the selection. When it came to the agreed announcement day, the agency provided a follow-up email with the URL to the winner’s Facebook page to confirm that the winner was happy with them announcing the winner that day. The winner was announced via a branded MP4 #BIGFiestaGiveaway post on the Hendy Group Facebook account and at the announcement stage, the winner was not aware that they had won until Hendy Group tagged them in the post. The winner commented on the status, and it was this that led to the confusion as to whether the winner was the sibling-in-law of a Hendy Group employee. They said they took all actions to investigate whether there was a familial relationship and were happy with the outcome showing that it was not true. They said the winner was not an employee’s sibling-in-law by marriage but rather was married to the cousin of an employee’s de facto spouse. They said under the policies issued by their manufacturer partners, that did not constitute a family relationship and as such the winner would not qualify to receive any family discounts or similar.
The ASA considered that the term of the prize draw “This BIG Fiesta Giveaway competition is free to enter, no purchase is necessary and it is open to residents of the UK aged 18 and over, other than Hendy employees, their families…” was likely to be understood by consumers to mean that family members of Hendy employees would be excluded from the prize draw.
We understood that the winner was married to the cousin of an employee’s de facto spouse and we considered that consumers would not expect such a person to be excluded from the promotion based on the wording of the terms and conditions. Whilst we considered that in general it would have been preferable for the terms and conditions to set out specifically which relations of employees would and would not be excluded from entry, in this case we did not consider that the promotion had been administered unfairly or that the terms and conditions were likely to mislead. We therefore concluded that the promotion had not breached the CAP Code.
We investigated the ad under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising) and 8.2 8.2 Promoters must conduct their promotions equitably, promptly and efficiently and be seen to deal fairly and honourably with participants and potential participants. Promoters must avoid causing unnecessary disappointment. and 8.14 8.14 Promoters must ensure that their promotions are conducted under proper supervision and make adequate resources available to administer them. Promoters, agencies and intermediaries should not give consumers justifiable grounds for complaint. (Promotions) but did not find it in breach.
No further action necessary.