UK electronics retailer
The Link
was rapped today by the
Advertising
Standards Authority (ASA) for misleading claims about an internet telephony
service.
The email ad for a web telephony service in partnership with
Freetalk
sparked a row after
BT objected to
claims that the offering was cheaper than its own services.
The advertisement stated: 'Freetalk is the UK's cheapest home phone calls
package: saves £100 vs BT. Freetalk gives you unlimited local and national
calls. Freetalk gives you cheap international call rates. Freetalk is easy to
use, all you need is a broadband connection.'
After making these claims the ad featured a table comparing the monthly and
'first year' costs of Freetalk One year, Freetalk Monthly, BT Together Option 3,
Telewest and Tesco Home Phone.
BT objected that the comparison table with BT Together Option 3 was
misleading, because it also offers a VoIP service with BT Broadband Talk, which
BT believes is more comparable.
The ASA rejected claims from The Link and Freetalk that they believed the ad
"would not materially mislead".
"We noted that BT Broadband Talk offered consumers a VoIP service and
considered that, in the context of an ad for a service that offered internet
calls only, the BT Broadband Talk package was more comparable than the BT
Together Option 3 package," the ASA stated.
"We concluded that, because The Link and Freetalk Communication were offering
a new type of product, and that product met the same needs as BT Together Option
3, it was acceptable in this case to compare those packages.
"But, in the absence of a clear and prominent statement that BT offered a
more comparable internet phone service, we considered that recipients could
wrongly infer that BT Together Option 3 was the BT package most comparable to
Freetalk."
The watchdog added that The Link and Freetalk Communication did not plan to
use the email again and told them to ensure that future similar comparisons
included a qualifying statement about the most comparable phone service near to
the savings claim or comparison table and in similar sized text.
The ad was ruled to have breached CAP Code clauses 7.1 (Truthfulness), 18.1
and 18.3 (Comparisons with identified competitors and/or their products).
It was also investigated under CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 18.2
(Comparisons) but was not found in breach.
Do you agree?
Have your say on this article