Ad description
An email, received on 16 June 2016, from Matchbook an online betting website, had the subject line "Risk-free bet on England v Wales". Text in the email stated "... we are giving you an in-play risk-free bet on your mobile for the game ... If your bet loses, we will refund your stake up to £25. It's a win win for you!".
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the claim "risk-free bet" was misleading, because having placed a bet, they did not receive the advertised refund.
Response
Matchbook said they understood the need to ensure that qualifications to their offers were sufficiently prominent in their advertising. They said the email was an initial introduction to the offer and if the recipient selected the “Bet Now” option they were taken to another page, which explained the main conditions of the bet, namely the odds required, which were 1.9 or less, and the need to place the bet via a mobile phone. The page included a further link to a more detailed terms and conditions page.
Matchbook said the bet was risk-free because, should the player lose the bet, their stake would be returned to them as cash without any rollover conditions or further wagering requirements. They said the terms and conditions page stated that funds would be returned to players as cash, but due to an error, the page also stated that a rollover condition had to be met before withdrawal of the funds.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers would understand the claim “risk-free bet” to mean that they could make a bet on the England v. Wales match without risk, because if they lost the bet, their stake would be refunded to them and withdrawable as cash. We understood that customers were not required to place further bets in order to release their stake refund. However, that was contrary to what was explained on the terms and conditions page which, due to an error, stated both that the stake would be refunded as cash to the customer’s account and that additional bets were needed before the refund became eligible for withdrawal.
We understood that the complainant had been refused the advertised refund, because his bet exceeded maximum odds of 1.9. We acknowledged that the "BET NOW" click though page stated "Place an in-play bet on mobile on England v Wales @ 1.9 or less". However, we considered that such a restriction on the odds was a significant condition to the offer that consumers needed to be aware of before they clicked on the “Bet Now” option in order for them to make an informed decision on whether or not to participate in the promotion. Therefore, we considered that it should have been included in the ad itself and concluded that the email was likely to mislead consumers as to the nature of the advertised “risk-free bet”.
The email breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
(Misleading advertising),
3.9
3.9
Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify.
and
3.10
3.10
Qualifications must be presented clearly.
CAP has published a Help Note on Claims that Require Qualification.
(Qualification) and
8.2
8.2
Promoters must conduct their promotions equitably, promptly and efficiently and be seen to deal fairly and honourably with participants and potential participants. Promoters must avoid causing unnecessary disappointment.
(Promotions) and
8.17
8.17
All marketing communications or other material referring to promotions must communicate all applicable significant conditions or information where the omission of such conditions or information is likely to mislead. Significant conditions or information may, depending on the circumstances, include:
(Significant conditions for promotions).
Action
The email must not appear again in its current form. We told Triplebet Ltd to ensure that their future ads included significant limitations and qualifications to their offers.
