| Bulletin | 09/6 |
| Batch No. | 189 |
| Ref | 12338 |
| Product | Household |
| Advertiser | A1 Waste |
| Agency | |
| Medium | Press |
| Complaint Advertisement: The advertisement appeared under the heading ‘Skip Hire’ and featured a picture of a standard skip and stated: “A1 Waste (01) 4664444 Mini skips from €65 Standard skips from €99 Saturday Specials Available. Terms & conditions apply”. Complaint: The complainant rang A1 Waste to enquire about hiring a standard skip which was advertised “from €99”. He was told that there were no standard skips for that price, only skip bags. The complainant considered skip bags not to be the same as standard skips as he said that they would not hold half the amount. He also felt strongly that the advertising was misleading as it featured a picture of a standard skip, not a skip bag. |
|
| 2006 Code | |
| 2002 Code |
|
| Response The advertisers said that both steel skips and skip bags are legally defined as skips. They said that it was untrue to state that skip bags “would not hold half of the amount of a standard skip”. They said that they use a variety of sizes of skip bags and steel skips. The volume of a standard steel skip was approximately 3.14 cubic metres while the volume of a standard skip bag was approximately 3.4 cubic metres, which meant that the skip bag has over 8% more volume than the steel skip. Further Information: The Secretariat asked the advertisers to identify their source for the legal definition of a steel skip and skip bag as mentioned in their response. They also asked them to comment on the limitations of putting sharp objections into a skip bag as opposed to a steel skip. The advertisers in their response to this query said that there was no difference in the waste which can be placed in a steel skip or a skip bag. Both were designed to take all waste types, other than hazardous waste. Many sharp items, such as glass, steel, etc are collected in both. The advertisers enclosed a copy of the Bray Skip Bye –Laws in relation to the control of skips on public roads to illustrate that legally steel skips and skip bags are the same. The Secretariat also viewed the advertisers’ website and noted that they recommended skip bags for light builder’s waste, whereas the steel skip was recommended for builder’s waste with no mention of the word ‘light’. The Secretariat also noted that the Bray Bye Laws in relation to skips on public roads came into effect on 1st March 2001 and contained no reference no skip bags. |
|
| Conclusion Complaint Upheld. The Complaints Committee considered the detail of the complaint and the advertisers’ response. While acknowledging that the skip bags and steel skips could hold approximately the same amount of waste they considered that there was a difference between the types of waste that could be disposed of in a skip bag compared to a standard skip. They noted that the advertisers had highlighted this fact on their website by referring to the disposal of ‘light builder’s waste’ in a standard skip bag compared to the disposal of ‘builder’s waste’ in a standard skip. On this basis they considered that the provisions of the Code had been contravened. Action Required: The advertisement must not run in its current format again. |
|