Print This Post
Bulletin: 22/4
Batch: 280
Reference: 39243
Product: Business
Advertiser: Parcel Motel
Influencer:
Agency:
Medium: Internet (Company Website)
Codes:
ASAI Code 7th Edition: 2.4(c), 4.1, 4.4, 4.9, 4.10, 4.27
The advertisers’ website promoted a parcel delivery service between Ireland and the UK (mainland only), alongside a range of prices depending on the size of the parcel.
When the complainant logged into their account on the advertisers’ website in order to ship a parcel to the UK mainland, the UK address was not recognised by the site. On enquiry, the complainant was told that this service was no longer available. They considered the advertising to be misleading.
The advertisers acknowledged receipt of the complaint and said they would respond. They did not however respond to the detail of the complaint.
Complaint Upheld.
The Complaints Committee considered the detail of the complaint. The Complaints Committee expressed concern at the advertisers’ failure to respond to the complaint. They reminded them that there is an onus on advertisers to ensure that their advertising is in conformity with the Code.
The Committee noted the Code requirements that marketing communications should not contain claims – whether direct or indirect, expressed or implied – which a consumer would be likely to regard as being objectively true unless the objective truth of the claims can be substantiated (4.9) and that relevant evidence should be sent without delay if requested by the ASAI and should be adequate to support both detailed claims and the overall impression created by the marketing communication. (4.10). In addition, if a product proves to be unavailable for any reason, or only available in insufficient quantity to meet demand, advertisers should take immediate action to ensure that any further marketing communications are amended or withdrawn. (4.27).
They noted that evidence to support the claim made in the advertising had not been submitted and, in light of this and in the absence of a response from the advertisers, the Committee concluded that the advertisement was in breach of Code sections 3.10, 4.9, 4.10 and 4.27 of the Code.
ACTION REQUIRED:
The advertisement should not reappear in its current form.