Ad description
A website, www.oxbridgeessays.com, an essay writing service, included a web page headed "Our Promises & Guarantees". Further text stated "Oxbridge Essays aims to provide the best essay writing services available in the UK. This aim is backed up by the highest level of guarantees of any legitimate UK essay-writing company" and "Definite Grade ... We guarantee that you will receive at least the grade you order (1st Class, 2:1, 2:2). If not, we'll give you your money back!".
Another web page was headed "Terms & Conditions" which included "14. The client agrees that the Upper 1st, 1st Class, 2:1 or 2:2 guarantees provided by The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd. in no way represents any guarantee that were the same written material to be submitted to the client's university or school then the client would receive that degree mark. All written materials supplied by The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd. to the client are meant only to be used as model examples of what the client's own work might be like. For a client to hand in any written material written by The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd. as if it were that client's own is strictly prohibited by The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd. and represents a breach of our copyright. Further, once any work supplied by The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd. to the client has been altered or used as inspiration for the client's own work then that work is no longer exactly the same work supplied by The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd. and so carries none of its guarantees as to its class standard".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the claim "Definite Grade ... We guarantee that you will receive at least the grade you order (1st Class, 2:1, 2:2). If not, we'll give you your money back!" was misleading.
Response
The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd did not provide a written response to the complaint but did respond via telephone. They said the claim related to the standard of work of the essay writing service they provided and not to the grade a customer would receive from their university or college if they submitted a sample essay as their own work. Furthermore, they pointed out that their terms and conditions prohibited submitting the essay as one's own work. They also said they employed ex markers to ensure that the standard of work was accurate and consistent with official marking guidelines.
Assessment
Upheld
The complainant believed the claim was misleading because it implied that if customers submitted the essay for marking and did not receive the grade they ordered, they would be able to get their money back. They also objected to the claim on the grounds that only official markers could officially grade essays and other work. They did not believe, therefore, that the advertiser could "guarantee" that the sample essay was of the grade ordered.
Although the terms and conditions of the website prohibited it, we considered the claim in question implied that if you submitted a sample essay for marking and did not receive the grade you ordered, you could get your money back. We therefore considered that the terms and conditions contradicted, rather than clarified, the claim.
We also considered it was misleading to imply the grade ordered was guaranteed because, although the Oxbridge Research Group Ltd employed ex markers, they were not able to officially grade essays or other work and had not explained upon what grounds the grade of the essay could be said to be "guaranteed". We also noted they had not provided any evidence that their customers had been able to claim their money back.
We therefore concluded that the claim breached the Code.
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), 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) and 3.54 3.54 Marketing communications must make clear each significant limitation to an advertised guarantee (of the type that has implications for a consumer's rights). Marketers must supply the full terms before the consumer is committed to taking up the guarantee. (Guarantees and after-sales service).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told The Oxbridge Research Group Ltd not to state or imply that they could guarantee grades, or that customers could get their money back, unless they held robust evidence that this was the case and it did not contradict their terms and conditions.
