A claim on a website for domain hosting services, www.webhost.uk.net, stated "Why choose us? 100% customer satisfaction".
The complainant, a customer, challenged whether the claim "100% customer satisfaction" was misleading and could be substantiated, because he had experienced a network failure lasting over 168 hours.
WEBHOSTUK Ltd did not respond to the ASA's enquiries.
The ASA was concerned by WEBHOSTUK Ltd's lack of substantive response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code rule 1.7 1.7 Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code. (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to provide a substantive response to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.
Because WEBHOSTUK Ltd had not provided any evidence to substantiate the claim "100% customer satisfaction", we concluded that the claim was misleading.
The claim breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.7 1.7 Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code. (Unreasonable delay), 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).
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We referred the matter to CAP's Compliance team.