Who: The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) and Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com
Where: United Kingdom
When: 15 May 2024
Law stated as at: 10 June 2024
What happened:
PrettyLittleThing published 15 social media posts in November 2023, during the Black Friday period. These posts ran alongside similar ads on other social media channels, and promoted a limited-time price promotion alongside discount codes.
For example, ad (a) stated “30% OFF EVERYTHING* CODE: PINK30 […] Ends 12pm”; ad (b) stated “3 HOURS ONLY CODE PINK33 For 33% off EVERYTHING”; and ad (c) stated “PINK MONDAY EXTENDED PINK30 For 30% Off Everything*”.
The ASA challenged this series of posts in relation to:
- whether certain posts (including the ones set out above) misleadingly implied that the promotions applied to all products sold by PrettyLittleThing;
- the use of closing dates: whether not including a closing date on the ad – for example, in ad (c) – or including a closing date but extending or shortening the promotional period, breached the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct and Promotional Marketing (CAP Code); and
- whether the ads misleadingly implied that further discounts would not be available when a promotion ended.
PrettyLittleThing argued that the Black Friday period had become well known as a period when businesses offered promotions to UK consumers and that their advertising was reflective of their customers’ expectations. They also said that they tried to include significant conditions to promotions in ads and included end dates and qualifying information through asterisks where possible. PrettyLittleThing argued that there were detailed terms and conditions on their website, available for customers to review.
However, all three issues were upheld by the ASA. It held that the headline claims referencing “everything” and “every single thing” would lead consumers to understand that the promotions included all products sold by PrettyLittleThing. Despite the fact that some ads included qualifying information setting out the excluded items, this was in very small font at the bottom of the ads and was therefore not sufficient to counter the overall impression that all products were included in the sale.
Furthermore, the ASA considered that information about what product lines were included or excluded in the promotions would be a significant condition likely to influence consumers’ decisions – and therefore should have been included in the ads. The absence of any information about exclusions would lead consumers to understand that the promotion included all product lines: the fact that this was not the case led to ASA to conclude that the ads were misleading.
The ASA also held that certain ads were misleading because the promotional price ran for longer than the usual, higher selling price, and because the discounts did not end at the closing date and time that was indicated (or a new, almost identical discount was immediately offered). PrettyLittleThing did not make it clear how long the promotion would last and failed to demonstrate that this would not disadvantage consumers. Multiple discounts at different rates and lengths of time were offered on the same day, and others extended the promotional period or repeated the promotion. Therefore, the ASA considered that PrettyLittleThing misled consumers as to the closing date and time, and breached the CAP Code.
Why this matters:
This decision demonstrates the importance of displaying significant terms and conditions of promotions to consumers, particularly the closing date and time of campaigns and any exclusions. It also demonstrates the need to consider how multiple promotions or discounts might interact with one another to potentially mislead consumers.
