Ad description
A press ad for Isiris Racing Services included the header "NEW MONTHLY MEMBERSHIP" and stated "In October 2012, for the 1st time ever, we introduced 'Monthly Membership' so that people could try out our unique service for a few months before committing to annual membership. They paid just £195 for their first trial month of October - AND WON OVER £2,800 PROFIT EACH*". Small print at the bottom of the ad included "*All bets proofed in advance to the Racing Post as evidence. Total bank required for above profits = £3000 ... Total turnover for October profit = £13,500".
Issue
The complainant, who did not believe that all of Isiris' members would be able to place bets at the odds tipped by Isiris, challenged whether the claim "won over £2,800 profit each" was misleading.
Response
Isiris Racing Services (Isiris) did not agree with the basis of the complaint. They said they were not responsible for the behaviour of bookmakers, and that it was equivalent to holding an advertiser responsible if a shop refused to sell a product to a consumer. They said if a bookmaker stopped an individual from betting they should use a different one. Isiris said they proofed their tips with the Racing Post and submitted a summary of their forecasts for October 2012. The Racing Post submitted the full proofing documentation.
Assessment
Upheld
The complainant said they had subscribed to a trial membership with Isiris, and had not been able to obtain the odds tipped by Isiris despite calling them as soon as the tips became available and immediately attempting to place the bets online. They believed this was because bookmakers would react to tips which they knew might attract large bets, and would therefore shorten the odds. The proofing documentation which Isiris had submitted to the Racing Post prior to making their tips available demonstrated that at that particular point in time the odds were available. However, we considered that the claim "won over £2,800 profit each" would be understood by consumers to mean that members of Isiris's service were able to achieve this level of profit, if they staked the recommended amounts. The profit claim was based on odds at the time Isiris sent out the tips, rather than starting prices. Although we considered consumers would understand that odds could change and were outside of the direct control of Isiris, we also considered that for the profit claim to be substantiated Isiris should have been able to demonstrate either that this level of profit was achieved by a significant number of their members, or that the odds the selections were tipped at were available for a significant amount of time after the tips became available, i.e. long enough for their members to have reasonable opportunity to back the selections at the tipped odds. We had not been provided with evidence that the odds tipped were available for any particular length of time after the tips had been made available to their customers, or that any of their customers had achieved the level of profit quoted based on their tips. We therefore concluded the claim was misleading.
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
3.11
3.11
Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product.
(Exaggeration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Isiris not to make profit claims for their service, unless they could demonstrate that this level of profit was achievable by their customers based on their tips.
