Background
Summary of Council decision
Two issues were investigated, of which one was Upheld and one Not upheld.
Ad description
A website and email for an online florist:
a. The main website included the statement "Our talented florist [sic] can send flower arrangement [sic] across Ireland and Northern Ireland. Popular cities and towns we deliver flora are Dublin, Belfast, Cork City, Limerick City and Derry City. Our network of florist [sic] can also deliver flowers to small cities within Ireland including Bray, Waterford City and Newly. The population of Ireland is 6 million but no need to worry, our network of florists have the entire Irish population covered. In fact we can deliver flowers next day if required".
The 'Flowers by Post' section of the website included the text "Flowers By Post: When you think of flowers, you think of luxury, love, the giving of gifts, the seasons, friends, family and a whole host of other emotions to boot. These are sentiments and emotions which we're keen to uphold, and we're proud to offer a comprehensive range of fantastic value flowers by post without detracting from the beauty, quality and appearance of the blooms and bouquets which we sell. Our postal flowers are purchased alongside all the flowers we buy, from the finest Grand Prix roses and huge Cymbidium orchids, to pretty mint green and pastel pink carnations or vibrant Alstroemeria grown right here in the UK. All of our flowers, regardless of price, come from the same trusted sources and meet the same exacting quality standards which florists, flower shops and customers all round all expect of their flowers. By that token, our discount flowers and flower offers might be "cheap flowers", but they're certainly not what we'd call "cheap" flowers. What makes our cheap flowers such excellent value, without a compromise on quality, is down to the time, effort and skill put in by our florists, and thanks to the hard work we put into maintaining excellent relationships with our growers and the auctioneers at the fresh flower markets"
b. The email, sent on 13 February 2013, stated "Don't miss your last chance to order flowers for Valentine's Day tomorrow! With a dozen beautiful red roses now just £19.90. you'll not find a better deal, especially considering we also include your very own choice of Valentine's Day card and free chocolates if you order online....not to mention Valentine's Day delivery is GUARANTEED if you order by 4pm, subject to stock. Don't miss out!". The email also included an image of a bunch of roses and text in a large font stating "GUARANTEED VALENTINE'S DAY DELIVERY".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether:
1. the webpage misleadingly implied that deliveries in Northern Ireland would be carried out by local florists when he understood some orders were issued from the UK mainland, and
2. the claim GUARANTEED VALENTINES'S DELIVERY" was misleading because he was told they could not guarantee next day delivery for non-mainland destinations.
Response
1. Colonial Gifts Ltd t/a iflorist.co.uk said that it offered flowers for delivery through two main channels and that they had a range of flowers that were made up and hand delivered by local florists. They also had a range of flowers that were made up and delivered through a postal network. They said they had local florists in Northern Ireland and provided details from their supplier database to demonstrate this. iflostist.co.uk said that these suppliers were members of iflorist and paid a monthly fee in return for receiving regular orders from their websites and that other florist network members could always use their bespoke shop ordering system for customers who came into their shop with delivery requests out of their area. They stated that the complainant had nine florists in their immediate local area who were able to provide a florist delivered service to that area via iflorist and provided screenshots (from their network database) of local florists, including address details of two of those examples. They said that in Belfast more generally, they had 133 florists as members and provided a screenshot of their database to demonstrate this. They said that orders made through the general section of their website were carried out by local florists (including those orders made in Northern Ireland) and that it was only those orders made through the "Orders by Post" section that would result in postal deliveries from the mainland.
2. They said that, at the time the email ad was sent, the next-day delivery guarantee only applied to UK mainland addresses and accepted that this information should have been included in the ad. They said that, going forward, they were working on supplying next day deliveries for Northern Ireland (delivered within 24 hours of order) but that, in the event that an order missed the window for that delivery, they would ensure existing information about potential exemptions for non-mainland deliveries would be kept in the frequently asked questions section of their website.
Assessment
1. Not upheld
The ASA understood that there were two sections of the website, one of which was for general orders which were carried out by local florists, and the Flowers by Post section, where flowers were sent by post from the UK mainland. Evidence was provided which demonstrated that orders made through the general part of the website (in this case the 'Flowers For Ireland' part of the website), were arranged and delivered by local florists in Northern Ireland.
The 'Flowers by Post' section of the international website made no reference to local florists but did state that the flowers were sourced from "florists, growers and buyers". Although the ad stated that they used their "trusted sources" for this element of their service, we considered it did not imply that flowers ordered through Flowers by Post would result in deliveries from customers' local florists. Furthermore, we considered the fact that all orders processed through the Flowers by Post section were delivered from the UK Mainland was not a significant piece of information that was likely to affect a transactional decision. We therefore concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead.
On this point we investigated ad (a) under CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
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) 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) but did not find it in breach.
2. Upheld
We noted the complainant believed that because all of the responses to this promotion were delivered from the mainland and that next-day delivery was therefore not guaranteed for all locations (including Northern Ireland), the ad should have included the location from which the flowers would be posted. However, there was nothing in the ad to suggest the flowers would be delivered from local florists and we therefore considered that the location of dispatch was unlikely to affect a transactional decision. We noted the email ad, which was received on 13 February 2014, included the claims "Valentine's Day delivery is GUARANTEED", "GUARANTEED VALENTINES DELIVERY" and "Don't miss your last chance to order flowers for Valentine's Day tomorrow!". We therefore considered that, in the absence of qualification, recipients of the email would understand that next day delivery (on Valentine's Day) was guaranteed for all recipients. Because the guaranteed next-day delivery was not available for non-mainland destinations, we concluded that ad (b) was misleading.
On this point ad (b) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
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) 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).
Action
Ad (b) should not appear again in its current form. We told Colonial Gifts Ltd to include clear qualifications in their ads.
