Claims of being the "World's Most Experienced" a problem?
The British Advertising Standards Authority is investigating advertisements run by Qantas in Britain containing the claim "The World's Most Experienced Airline". Is this not simply puffery and be left to stand? But would the issue have been raised except by a British public in response to an Australian company promoting its wares?
The ACCC looking for two-price advertising in the bed industry
The ACCC recently announced that it would be reviewing
advertising in the bedding industry to determine whether retailers
are legitimately using two price advertising. Two price advertising
is generally in the form of "$1,999/now $1,299" or
"$1,999 $1,299". As the Chairman of the
ACCC notes, this represents that "the current price is less
than they would have paid previously or what they will pay for it
in the future". It is misleading if that is not the case. All
two price advertising should therefore be used cautiously and with
discretion.
Promoting a machine as being in "excellent condition" mere puffery
Dr Langov advertised an optical laser machine on his website, promoting it to be in "excellent condition". After an initial use, it proved to be defective and not in good working order. Despite that, the NSW Supreme Court found the claim to be mere puffery. The nature of the product and the decision making process was critical.
Read the Judgment [especially [46-47]
Two-price advertising hits again
Rubelli Designs has provided court enforceable undertakings to the ACCC over its two-price advertising. This advertising was misleading and deceptive, Rubelli Designs having accepted that it had not previously offered the product at the "was" price or at RRP (which was also advertised).
Do you want to know more?
Read the Undertakings
What you must do to justify two-price advertising
Before the Proud's decision, the Commission's approach to these cases was to look at the actual prices of product sold in the preceding month or six months. Prouds established that showing actual sales at the "was" price is not necessary provided the product was advertised or offered for the "was" price in the lead-up to the campaign. Interestingly, in the Rubelli Designs matter, the ACCC's approach has changed to reflect this. However, this may be temporary. The Proud's decision is currently on appeal.
ACCC applies for compensation on behalf of consumers
The ACCC recently instituted proceedings against the Designer Brand Outlet for representing that it sells genuine designer label women's clothing when, in fact, it offered no such clothing and, in some cases, counterfeit clothing. In a rare move, the ACCC indicated that it may bring a representative action for compensation for consumers misled. This move may be the result of the sheer number of people affected, as the ACCC generally leaves those affected to pursue their own action.
Clarus Telecom taken to task for its telemarketers
Do not think that statements made orally by telemarketers will not lead to prosecution. The ACCC has prosecuted Clarus Telecom as a result of its telemarketers claiming that the company and its services are affiliated with or provided by Telstra. On 26 November 2008, the Federal Magistrates' Court declared that Clarus Telecom breached the TPA even though the conduct occurred overseas.
Biodegradability claims misleading
The Federal Court recently declared that SeNevens engaged in misleading and deceptive conduct by marketing its Safeties Nature Nappy as "100% biodegradable". However, as the product contained some plastic components it was not capable of "being broken down by the biological activity of living organisms". To call a product "biodegradable", the whole product must break down naturally, and within a relatively short period.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
