Ad description
A paid-for search result for Aerial Force, an aerial repair company, seen on 9 September 2016, stated "Satellite TV Repair ... Same Day Service".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the claim "Same day service" was misleading and could be substantiated.
Response
TV Aerial Company Ltd t/a Aerial Force stated that they offered a same-day service throughout their coverage areas and it was an extreme rarity that, where they had agreed to attend on the same day of a client's telephone call, that they were unable to do so. They said they continuously monitored work levels to ensure their commitment to a same-day service was maintained at all times. The advertiser said they were committed to offering a same-day service when requested, although some clients would preschedule appointments in advance on the date and time of their choosing.
Aerial Force said that they currently attended between 170 and 220 appointments per day and rarely was there a situation where they were unable to keep those appointments. On the occasion described, an unforeseen circumstance meant that the complainant was contacted at the earliest opportunity with news of the necessary cancellation. Aerial Force explained that, on the day of the complainant's appointment, the engineer scheduled to attend had contacted their dispatch team late in the afternoon to inform them that he was unwell and would be unable to keep his scheduled appointments. Due to the lateness in the day, Aerial Force had been unable to attend and provide a quotation for the complainant. They provided a selection of invoices and booking sheets for appointments carried out between April and September 2016, which were from clients requesting same day services. The booking sheets stated the day on which the appointments had been made, and the invoices confirmed the date on which the appointments were attended.
Assessment
Not upheld
The ad stated "same day service" and we considered consumers would understand this to mean that Aerial Force would offer an appointment on the day of booking, if requested by customers. However, this was not stated to be 'guaranteed' and we considered consumers would appreciate that the provision of such a service would be limited according to staff availability. As such, they would not understand the service to be available in all instances but would expect the advertiser to be able to demonstrate that same-day appointments were generally made and kept.
We noted the booking sheets and invoices provided, and considered that they demonstrated the availability, provision and completion of appointments on the same day as requested by customers. We also noted that in the complainant's specific circumstances a same-day appointment had initially been available, but was cancelled because the staff member due to attend the appointment fell ill. We considered that such circumstances were exceptional and fell outside the control of the advertiser, and therefore did not consider that they generally contradicted the availability of the advertised same-day service. In light of the above, we considered that the claim "same day service" had been substantiated and concluded that the ad did not breach the 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 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), but did not find it in breach.
Action
No further action required.
