Background
Summary of Council decision:
Three issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A website promoting gambling systems, www.makelifeincome.com, seen in April 2020, featured the headlines “Give Me 15 Minutes Of Your Time And I’ll Teach You How To Make £50-£100 or more a Day From Your PC, Laptop, Or Even Your Phone”, “No Work...No Hassle...No Risk...But There Might Be A Catch” and “Read On To Discover What I Do, How You Can Copy Me, And Why You Might Not Want To Do It…”. Further text included “I have developed a clever ‘wheeze’ that allows me to rake in £50-£100 or more a Day from my PC (I made over £6,000 last month) and now I want to teach you how to copy me”, and “I used to be just like a lot of other people, caught in the rat race, working 9-5 for a boss I hated, for a rubbish salary. Coming home late…and not having any spare time to do the things I loved, let alone start up any sort of business. Perhaps it’s the same for you?”.
A subheading below stated “A System That’s Guaranteed To Pay!”, followed by further text which included “What I’m now presenting to you today is the results of months of trial and error”, “… I consistently and regularly get lots of small wins. But small wins add up to big profits” and ”Soon, I was able to finally quit my tedious and irritating job, focusing full time on this system. And it’s never failed me. Not once”. Another subheading stated “£60 In The First Hour”, followed by further text including “By using this method for just 4-5 days per week I now make more money than I ever did in my regular dead end job”.
A further subheading stated “Better than A business?” followed by further text which included “The method I use works specifically in online casinos. It’s important to know that I’m not actually gambling. I’m taking advantage of a glitch in the way the system online works”, “This wouldn’t work in a traditional casino, but online it works like magic”. Further text included “Will Guarantee You Win”, “bank up to £500 a day”, and “no risk”. Details of how to order “A Risk Free Copy Of My Roulette System” were outlined underneath.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the claims:
1. about the success of the system, such as “you never lose. So no risk”, “a system that’s guaranteed to pay” and the specific examples of profits made and were misleading and could be substantiated; and
2. that the system was unique and developed by the advertiser, and “wouldn’t work in a traditional casino”, were misleading and could be substantiated.
The ASA challenged whether:
3. the ad was socially irresponsible because it suggested that gambling was an alternative to employment and a way to achieve financial security.
Response
1, 2. & 3. Paul Coleman said that the ad was designed to generate interest in an opportunity to make money from roulette and was based on his experience of using a system that he had developed. He said that most of the feedback he received from clients was that they had earned money by participating in the system. He said that participants had to follow simple rules to make profits and that he could not be responsible for clients who did not follow the rules correctly. He said that the web page featuring the ad would be removed and the system would no longer be on sale.Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers reading the ad would believe that users of the system were guaranteed to win money with little to no financial risk. We considered that the claimed profits made, such as “£60 in the first hour” and “you can easily bank up to £500 a day” could encourage a consumer to place an order for the system. Paul Coleman had not provided any evidence to demonstrate that any users of the system had been successful and achieved profits, including the specific amounts quoted in the ad, as a result of using the system. We concluded that the claims for the system's success and profitability had not been substantiated and were therefore misleading.
On that point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 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 3.11 3.11 Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product. (Exaggeration).
2. Upheld
We considered that consumers would understand the claims that the system was unique and “wouldn’t work in a traditional casino” to mean that Paul Coleman offered a new method which had not previously been used in other gambling systems and which could only be used in non-traditional casinos, such as online casinos. The complainant understood that the method being sold was identical to methods that were available from other sources. Paul Coleman had not provided any evidence to demonstrate how his system worked, how it differed from other gambling systems or how the method was exclusively designed for non-traditional casinos. We concluded that the claims had not been substantiated and were misleading.
On that point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (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).
3. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that advertisers must not suggest that gambling can be a solution to financial concerns, an alternative to employment or a way to achieve financial security. We considered that the claims “I used to be just like a lot of other people, caught in the rat race, working 9-5 for a boss I hated, for a rubbish salary. Coming home late…and not having any spare time to do the things I loved, let alone start up any sort of business. Perhaps it’s the same for you?”, “Soon, I was able to finally quit my tedious and irritating job, focusing full time on this system” and “I now make more money than I ever did in my regular dead end job” would be interpreted by consumers to mean that the gambling system offered by the advertiser could be an alternative to employment and a way to achieve financial security. We concluded that the ad promoted a gambling service as an alternative to employment and a way to achieve financial security, and was therefore socially irresponsible.
On that point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 16.1 16.1 Marketing communications for gambling must be socially responsible, with particular regard to the need to protect children, young persons and other vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited. 16.3 16.3 Marketing communications must not: and 16.3.4 16.3.4 suggest that gambling can be a solution to financial concerns, an alternative to employment or a way to achieve financial security (Gambling).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Paul Coleman that they should hold evidence to support their claims about the success and profitability of their gambling system, including claims that it was guaranteed or risk-free, and references to specific profits made. We told them not to make claims that their gambling system offered a new method or that it only worked in non-traditional casinos if they did not hold any evidence to demonstrate that. We also told them to ensure that their ads were prepared in a socially responsible way and did not suggest that gambling could provide an alternative to employment or a way to achieve financial security.
