Who: The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and Medi Supplies Ltd
Where: United Kingdom
When: 24 January 2024
Law stated as at: 12 February 2024
What happened:
Two ads appeared on a website for Medi Supplies, an online retailer of medical products. An ad for “Koolpak Kool Patch” appeared along with the following text: “Special offer – buy today for the lowest price on the market”. Underneath the product’s name red text appeared stating: “As Low £2.76”. Another ad for “SoChlor DST Disinfectant Tablets” was accompanied by red text underneath the product’s name at the top of the listing stating “As Low As £2.64“.
The ads were challenged questioning price claims included in them, namely whether they were misleading and could be substantiated. The ASA upheld both complaints.
‘Lowest price’ claim
Regarding the first ad’s claim, “the lowest price on the market“, Medi Supplies replied that the claim was not removed by mistake after the product’s price had been increased.
The ASA noted that consumers would understand the first claim to be accurate at the time they viewed the ad. In order to substantiate the claim Medi Supplies would need to provide comparative sales data covering all retailers of the product across the UK, and the ASA has not been provided with it. Therefore, the ASA concluded that the claim had not been substantiated and was misleading.
‘As Low As’ claim
As regards the claim “As Low As” in the second ad, the company explained that it was a price of a diluter bottle intended for use with the tablets advertised rather than the tablets themselves. Medi Supplies said that it was due to the default settings of their website which showed the lowest price it could find in a price grid seen on a product’s page, including accessories. “As Low As” price was deployed so consumers could compare the product and its associated accessories if available. The company said that nevertheless consumers could see the actual price of the product before making a purchase.
The ASA noted that the claim “As Low As £2.64” was placed underneath the product’s name and description of the product contained specifications of the medicines. This would make consumers expect that the price concerned the lowest price at which they could buy the advertised tablets. The ASA also noted that the product itself could be purchased at the lowest price of £13.80. The ASA understood that this was due to the default settings of the website, which would cause problems in case accessories were available; however, it concluded that, because the price stated did not reflect the actual price of the product, the claim had not been substantiated and was misleading.
The company believed the impact of claims in both ads to be minimal as the sales were low, but committed to making changes.
Why this matters: Price claims have been under an increasing scrutiny in the UK. Businesses should take a cautionary approach when making such claims in ads. The UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct & Promotional Marketing (CAP Code) provides that price claims must not mislead by omission, undue emphasis or distortion and that they must relate to the product featured in the ad. In addition, rule 3.7 of the CAP Code states that advertisers must hold documentary evidence to prove the claims which are likely to be understood as objective by consumers. Businesses should be able to substantiate their price claims and make sure that the price relates to the advertised product to avoid misleading consumers.
