Ad description
A poster ad for Powwownow, a conference calling service, appeared on the London underground. Text stated "Pay for a conference calling service. Or don't. It's your call. For business people with more sense than money". Small text below stated "Free service. You only pay for the cost of your phone call. For full terms & conditions visit our website".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the claims that the service was free were misleading because the ad did not make clear the extent of the commitment the consumer must make to take advantage of it.
Response
Powwownow said that unlike other conference call providers, they did not charge a bridging fee, which was a charge for connecting participants to a conference call. They connected calls for free and users paid only the cost of their own call, which was added to the costs in their standard telecoms bill. They said they had a 'no contract no commitment' policy for their main service and therefore no continuous commitment was required on the user's part. Powwownow said they had only ever advertised the main service and the small print clearly stated that they offered a free service; the only costs incurred were associated with the actual calls. They said the ad offered consumers a clear choice, whether or not to pay for a conference calling service and in choosing Powwownow, consumers chose not to pay. They believed the ad was not misleading.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the "free" part of Powwownow's conference calling service was the lack of bridging fee we understood was charged by some other operators, but that call charges nevertheless applied. We considered the overall impression of the ad, in particular the claim "Pay for a conference calling service. Or don't. It's your call" and the small print "Free service", was such that it was likely to be interpreted as suggesting the service was entirely free. While we acknowledged that the ad also included the small print "You only pay for the cost of your phone call", we considered that contradicted the overall impression of the ad (that the service was entirely free) rather than providing clarification. We also noted the ad did not make clear the nature of the phone calls consumers had to pay for, which we understood incurred the costs associated with 0844 calls. We considered the ad was misleading because it did not make sufficiently clear, without contradiction, the extent of the commitment a consumer must make to take advantage of the free element of the service. We therefore concluded that it breached the Code.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
and
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),
3.9
3.9
Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify.
(Qualification) and
3.23
3.23
Marketing communications must make clear the extent of the commitment the consumer must make to take advantage of a "free" offer.
(Free).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Powwownow to ensure their future advertising made clear the extent of the commitment consumers must make to take advantage of their bridging fee-free service.
