Ad description
Two email ads for Euro Car Parts Ltd:
a. An email received on the 26 May 2022 stated, “Up to 45% off Car Parts Ends Tonight!” in the subject header. The body of the email contained a countdown timer with text “MID SEASON SALE UP TO 45% OFF CAR PARTS*” and “USE CODE MID”. Conditions stated, “*Excludes performance parts, gifts, tools & Garage Equipment. Offer Ends 26th May 2022”.
b. An email received on 27 May 2022 stated, “Make a Splash & Save 10% Off Selected Swimming Pools!” in the subject header. The body of the email contained text, “JUBILEE SALE UP TO 50% OFF CAR PARTS*” and “USE CODE BANK”. Terms and conditions stated, “*Excludes performance parts, gifts, tools & Garage Equipment. Offer Ends Ends (sic) 31st May 2022”.
Issue
The complainant, who believed the advertised discounts did not represent genuine savings, challenged whether the ads were misleading.
Response
Euro Car Parts Ltd provided a pricing history covering a six-month period that included the advertised and actual sold price of all their products that had been included in their sales as advertised by their promotional emails sent on 26 and 27 May 2022. The data covered the period 1 January until 26 July and included sales made through all sales channels including online and in-store. They said that even though their terms of conditions from the two sales excluded in-store sales, store managers had the discretion to match online discounts, which they often did.
They said that in some instances the same part number appeared within the data several times and that showed where the same product had been advertised and sold at different prices across the six-month time period.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered consumers would understand that “MID SEASON SALE UP TO 45% OFF CAR PARTS…offer ends 26th May” and “Jubilee sale up to 50% off car parts…Offer ends 31st May” to mean that they would be making a genuine saving against the usual selling price of car parts and that a significant proportion of them would be discounted up to 45% and 50% respectively. We also considered that those savings claims referred to temporary price promotions and therefore the prices would revert to their usual higher selling prices after the end dates.
With reference to ad (a) we considered that consumers would understand that the use of a countdown timer displaying days, hours, minutes and seconds combined with the title of the email including the phrase “Ends tonight” to mean that the discounts on products covered in that sale would be unavailable after the end of the countdown and that the same products would revert to their usual selling price. We noted, however, that ad (b) introduced a sale with a larger discount the day after the previous sale had ended. It was therefore unlikely that the reductions in ad (b) would constitute savings against the usual selling price of the products.
We assessed the sales data provided by Euro Car Parts. With regard to the higher prices used as a reference for the savings claims, we noted that for a number of car parts, the ‘headline’ or reference price had fluctuated across that six-month time period with a proportion of the same car part sold at different ‘reference’ prices. We acknowledged that the fluctuation could have been attributed to when sales took place, but without any data relating to when those products had been sold at those prices, it was unclear as to whether that was the case. That meant it was not possible to identify a usual selling price for all the products that had been included in the sales data. In relation to those products that had a more static reference price, there was no data that enabled us to identify when or for how long any of those products had been sold at their reference price. Therefore, Euro Car Parts had not demonstrated that the savings claims represented a genuine saving against the usual selling price of the products.
In addition, we noted that the data showed that over 97% of car parts had been sold at a price that was lower than its headline or ‘reference’ price across the six-month period. It was not possible to determine whether the sales at the lower prices were only during the sales periods or whether the products were being sold at those prices throughout the six-month period. However, we considered that based on that data, the headline prices were unlikely to be realistic selling prices for the products, nor their usual selling prices.
For these reasons we concluded the savings claims had not been substantiated and were misleading.
The ads 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 3.17 3.17 Price statements must not mislead by omission, undue emphasis or distortion. They must relate to the product featured in the marketing communication. (Prices).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Euro Car Parts to ensure that their future savings claims did not mislead and to ensure that they substantiated savings claims against a usual selling price of their products.
