The ASA issued another warning earlier this month about making sure that promotions are run properly.
The CAP Code states that promoters are responsible for all aspects and stages of their promotions, which must be administered fairly and avoid causing unnecessary disappointment. It also states that promoters, agencies, and intermediaries should not give consumers justifiable grounds for complaint.
Wowcher's website featured a mystery holiday offer. A banner at the top of the webpage included the claim "FROM £99pp + Est £3.99 admin fee*". Text stated, "Mystery Holiday": Maldives, New York, Mexico, Dubai, Bali, Disneyland Paris & More!".
Once consumers purchased a voucher, they were required to select their preferred travel dates, airport region, and had to supply passenger information. The location of their holiday was then revealed based on availability provided by the third-party travel provider, who contacted the consumer to confirm the details of their holiday.
The complainant, who purchased a £99 mystery holiday, but was unable to book the holiday to the destination they were offered because it was no longer available and were offered other destinations at a higher cost, challenged whether the promotion had been administered fairly.
The ASA considered that consumers would understand from the ad that once their holiday destination had been revealed, they would be able to book a holiday to that destination without making any additional payments, unless a regional airport fee applied. As the consumer had already made the payment and provided their preferred travel dates before their holiday destination was revealed, the ASA considered that it was reasonable to expect that a holiday to that destination was available for that price.
The ASA acknowledged that Wowcher did not provide the holidays themselves and had no part in the consumer journey after a Mystery Holiday voucher had been redeemed. It also understood that travel was a fast-moving sector where pricing and availability could change frequently. However, the ASA emphasised that, as the promoter of the deal, Wowcher had a responsibility to ensure that it was administered fairly at all stages.
The link through which consumers entered their travel dates to reveal their holiday destination was supplied by Wowcher. Consumers were likely to view the reveal of their holiday destination as exciting, and experience considerable disappointment if they were subsequently unable to travel to that destination. As a consequence, the ASA said that Wowcher should have taken reasonable steps to avoid disappointing participants, for example, by ensuring that the third-party travel providers' holiday information was accurate. Because the complainant had not been able to book the Mystery Holiday they had been offered, the ASA considered that the promotion had not been administered fairly and was likely to have caused participants unnecessary disappointment.
This issue can often arise when part of a promotion, whether it's the administration or the fulfilment, is undertaken by a third party. The scenario we see here is a common one, where a promoter partners with a third party to provide a prize or some other benefit, and the promoter effectively passes the baton to the partner to fulfil the prize and has no control over that process. If the third party does not fulfil its end of the bargain, the promoter is usually the one left facing the consumer's ire.
For this reason, it is very important to ensure that all parties understand – and can comply with – their respective responsibilities and to ensure there is a contract in place to back this up. The ruling illustrates the importance of seeing a promotion through from end to end and not just assuming (or hoping!) that your third-party suppliers will do the right thing. See our guide here.
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.
