A complaint about Purplebricks has been informally resolved by the Advertising Standards Authority.
Its website stated: “14 days – on average it takes us just 14 days to find a buyer”. Upon clicking an icon next to the text the following text appeared in a pop up: “The average time taken from a property going live to a viewing being booked for the eventual purchaser is 14 days.”
Further text stated: “6 days – on average it takes us just 6 days to find a tenant”. Upon clicking an icon next to this text the following text appeared in a pop up: “The average time taken from a property going live to a viewing being booked for the eventual tenant is 6 days.”
The ASA received a complaint which challenged whether the claims a) “14 days – on average it takes us just 14 days to find a buyer” and b) “6 days – on average it takes us just 6 days to find a tenant” were misleading and could be substantiated.
After the ASA contacted the advertiser about the complaint, it agreed to remove the claims. “Based on this agreement we closed the case informally,” said an ASA spokesperson.
In a second informally resolved case, a local press ad for Cooper Adams Estates included the text: “ You’ll love us because…on average you’ll get £12,000 more”.
The ASA received a complaint which challenged whether the claim was misleading and could be substantiated.
The advertiser agreed to remove the claim.
A third informally resolved case concerned Martin & Co, in Banbury, Oxfordshire. A circular featured the claim “Give your home the exposure it deserves, to advertise your property in Banbury’s most prominent window display and book your FREE market appraisal today.” The other side of the circular featured the claim “to give your home the exposure it deserves, advertise your property in Banbury’s biggest and brightest window display. More Viewings. Shortened Void Periods.”
Wigwam challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:
- “Banbury’s most prominent window display” and “Banbury’s biggest…window display”;
- “More viewings”; and
- “Shortened Void Periods”.
The advertiser told the ASA they will amend the claims “Banbury’s most prominent window display” and “Banbury’s biggest…window display” to state that they believe the window display is one of the most prominent window displays in Banbury.
They also agreed to add the claim: “Our prominent accessible office provides us with more applicants than before, which can be converted into more viewings and produce shorter void periods”. This, said the ASA, makes clear that they are making a comparison between their old office and new office, rather than a comparison with their competitors.
Comments (8)
When an advertiser willingly accepts an informal resolution and a retraction to their claim isn’t that tantamount to accepting that they were trying it on all along?
ASA are a pointless waste of time and money.
I can make whatever outrageous claim I want, knowing full well if I get caught out I can say “Whoops. You are right that was naughty of me. Sorry. I have deleted it.”
Oh and they may put my name on the naughty list on the website no one looks at
Business’s found wanting with false claims etc by the ASA should be required to advertise the ASA ruling in the same place they were misleading and for the same length of time.
I have championed from day one that the ASA is not fit for purpose and this is yet another nail in their coffin. Business know that all they can do is “ask to stop”. Unscrupulous business take advantage of this FACT. While they are being naughty they rake in the income from unsuspecting consumers, taking advantage from other law abiding buisiness’s and only stop … with no penalty ….. when asked to. Often to only start with another outrageous claim as there is no fear of punishment for being caught a second, third …… twentieth time.
Naughty boys, rap on the knuckles now go away and don’t do it again because if you do we’ll have to get really tough with you and may have to shout a little bit!
The ASA must be the biggest set of clowns going. What is the point of their existence is they arent going to punish those that break the rules. Simply removing a “claim” after it has done countless damage to the competition is just not good enough, where is the deterrent to stop people just doing it again and again and again.
*Note* – Should the ASA not like to be referred to as clowns, when contacted i will remove that claim (then replace it with mugs when they aren’t looking)
I wouldnt worry,,they should let you resolve it informally like their other complaints..that seems to keep the work level down for them to go for lunch.
Where do honest businesses go to complain about the AsA… seem to be blind to the countless complaints on twitter etc.
…i emailed housing minister a few weeks ago,,not even got a reply.