Ad description
A website for an online supermarket, www.etefy.co.uk, seen on 14 May, stated "... ARRIVES IN 1 HOUR ..."
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the claim "Arrives in 1 hour" was misleading and could be substantiated.
Response
Etefy Ltd explained that they did not hold a list of exactly when deliveries arrived but they were working on technology to enable them to do that. They said they had thousands of deliveries each month. Of those deliveries, about 0.8% of customers complained, citing various reasons. From those complaints, about 60% were due to late delivery. They believed that 98% of those complaints about delivery were for reasons beyond their control and were in fact due to customers. The other 2% were due to other factors beyond their control such as roadworks or road traffic accidents. They also said delivery was subject to their terms and conditions. They therefore believed the claim was not misleading.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted that the claim did not contain any reference to a "guarantee" for delivery within one hour and that it was not linked to terms and conditions or qualifying text. We therefore considered that consumers were likely to understand "Arrives in 1 hour" to mean that their orders would be delivered within one hour, except in exceptional or unforeseeable circumstances.
We noted that Etefy Ltd did not currently track their deliveries and were unable to provide us with data showing the timeframes within which all their deliveries were made. We noted that the information provided was based on complaints to them and considered that might not capture all deliveries that were made outside the one-hour time frame as there might be customers who did not complain. We therefore considered that this information was inadequate substantiation to support the claim.
In the absence of adequate evidence to show that all deliveries arrived at customers' premises within one hour, except in exceptional or unforeseeable circumstances, we concluded that the claim had not been substantiated and 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. (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 3.9 3.9 Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify. (Qualification).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Etefy Ltd not to claim their service delivered within one hour unless that was always the case, save for exceptional and unforeseeable circumstances. We also told them to ensure they held adequate substantiation for their claims about delivery times.
