Background
Summary of council decision:
Three issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
The website for FreeFusion www.iphonespecialist.co.uk, seen in November 2015, included large text at the top of the home page next to an Apple logo, which stated “Approved repair centre” and “Original parts!”. Text stating “The best service of the year 2012”, “The best service of the year 2013” and “the best service of the year 2014” was shown inside laurels.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the following claims were misleading:
1. “Approved repair centre” with a visual of the Apple logo, because they understood the advertiser was not an approved Apple repair centre;
2. “Original parts!”, because they understood that the parts used were not original Apple parts; and
3. “The best service of the year 2012”, “The best service of the year 2013” and “the best service of the year 2014”, because the ad did not make clear what they related to.
Response
1. FreeFusion Ltd said they stated “Approved repair centre” because they were approved by Google as one of the top ranking sites in searches for iPhone repair centres, and that in order to be approved for that they needed to meet a certain standard. That approval allowed them to advertise their repair service. They said the Apple logo communicated that they repaired Apple phones, and consumers could check the Apple website if they wanted to determine if they were an Apple approved store.
2. FreeFusion said they used OEM (Original Equipment Manufacturer) parts to repair phones, and did not state on their site that they used original Apple parts.
3. FreeFusion said that the “best service of the year” shields were based on being awarded “The best service of the year” by eKomi in 2012, 2013 and 2014 and they were gold rated by them. They offered to change the wording to “the best service as awarded by eKomi” and to use the eKomi thumbs up logo instead of a shield.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA considered that the presentation of the text “Approved repair centre” next to an Apple logo would be interpreted by consumers to mean that FreeFusion was approved by Apple to carry out repairs. Because that was not the case we concluded the claim was misleading.
On this point 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),
3.7
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).
2. Upheld
We considered that the presentation of the text “Original parts!” would be interpreted by consumers to mean that FreeFusion used parts manufactured by Apple, particularly when presented next to an Apple logo and the text “Approved repair centre”. Because that was not the case we concluded the claim was misleading.
On this point 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),
3.7
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).
3. Upheld
We considered that consumers would understand the claims “The best service of the year 2012”, “The best service of the year 2013” and “the best service of the year 2014” shown inside laurels to mean that in those years FreeFusion were awarded “best service of the year” compared to other phone repair providers. However, the ad did not make clear who had made the awards and we considered it should have done so to avoid misleading consumers. We had also not seen any evidence that eKomi had awarded the site “best service of the year” in those years. We therefore concluded that the claims were misleading.
On this point 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),
3.7
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) and
3.33
3.33
Marketing communications that include a comparison with an identifiable competitor must not mislead, or be likely to mislead, the consumer about either the advertised product or the competing product.
(Comparisons with identifiable competitors).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told FreeFusion Ltd not to repeat the claims “Approved repair centre” or “Original parts!” and that they should take care when using logos to ensure they did not mislead. We also told them not to repeat the claims “The best service of the year 2012”, “The best service of the year 2013” and “the best service of the year 2014”.
