Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE ADVERTISING WATCHDOG has sided with Aldi in a complaint it lodged against supermarket rival Lidl.
The Advertising Standards Authority’s (ASA) today released its latest complaints bulletin, which featured complaints which were upheld against companies including Ryanair, car maker Dacia, and Shamrock Renewable Products.
The complaint against Lidl, which was lodged by Aldi, was upheld by the Council as being misleading.
In its complaint, Aldi pointed to TV, social media and press adverts in which Lidl claimed to be “Ireland’s Best Value Supermarket”, a claim which appeared on a rosette.
The press advert also included a trolley price comparison between Lidl and three competitors.
Aldi objected on the grounds that the advertising claim “Ireland’s Best Value Supermarket” implied Lidl had been awarded this title through a competition or an independent award.
Aldi added that nowhere in the advertisements had the claim been verified or substantiated.
Lidl said the claim was backed up by Ireland RepTrak data from last year – it’s an annual study based on the perceptions of over 5,000 members of the public.
Lidl said the 2024 report confirmed the ranking of retailers in respect to “offers products and services that are a good value for money”.
Lidl added that it had amended the campaign to include the appropriate Ireland RepTrak 2024 data at the bottom.
After an internal review of the campaign, Lidl said it was satisfied that the statements contained in the campaign adhered to the “spirit” of the ASA guidelines.
Lidl added that it had no doubt that the Ireland RepTrak findings “fully and adequately substantiated the claims of the campaign that Lidl was Ireland’s best value retailer”.
The ASA upheld the complaint and ruled that it should not appear again in that format.
The Council said that the claim to be the best value would require detailed price comparisons across all competitors, which had not been submitted to the ASA.
The Council also noted that the claim “Ireland’s Best Value Supermarket” had appeared on a rosette, something traditionally associated with a prize.
The Council deemed that a reasonable interpretation of the ad was that Lidl’s claim to be “Ireland’s Best Value Supermarket” was being made on foot of an award.
It therefore deemed the ad to be misleading and advised Lidl to ensure that appropriate substantiation was to hand for claims made.
In the case of Ryanair, the ASA deemed that a promotion which claimed “prices will rise” was misleading after prices actually dropped in the following month.
The complaint was lodged against a promotional banner on Ryanair’s website which advertised the airline’s “Big Summer Sale”.
The sale included flights from €29.99 and consumers were told to “book now” to travel between April and October, subject to terms and conditions.
To the right of these details, it said in a red circle “Prices Will Rise”.
However, a complainant said they considered the “definitive” statement that “Prices Will Rise” was misleading because some prices actually dropped after they had availed of the summer sale prices.
They said a flight they had purchased had a lower price the following month.
In response, Ryanair said the terms and conditions of the promotion stated that the offer was subject to availability and that the lowest fares were limited and sold out quickly.
Ryanair added that the fares required adjustment based on sales and customer demand due to dynamic pricing and that such adjustments did not guarantee availability of low fare seats.
The airline also said these adjustments did not guarantee that current fares would be comparable to future fares and claimed that that promotion was accurate.
Ryanair provided evidence to the ASA that, at the time for their response, the flight purchased by the complainant was on sale for a higher price than that offered during the promotional period.
However, the ASA’s Complaints Council upheld the complaint and ruled that the promotion must not reappear in the same form.
The ASA noted that the promotion said “Prices Will Rise” but did not offer qualification as to when.
The ASA added: “In the context of an advertising claim that “Prices Will Rise”, the Council considered it was reasonable for a consumer to presume that after the sale price promotion the price would increase rather than decrease.”
A spokesperson added that consumers would have “reasonably understood that prices would not fluctuate upwards during the promotional period unless they had additional clarifying information”.
The Council added that the promotion “created a pressure to purchase and a customer would likely have purchased a flight as soon as possible based on this information”.
Meanwhile, a complaint was upheld against car manufacturer Dacia, which was deemed to depict dangerous driving and unsafe practices.
The TV ad for a Dacia Sandero featured people using the car in various day-to-day settings, such as putting gifts or their dogs in the back of the car.
These scenes were intercut with scenes of the car being driven, including the car going around corners.
There is also a scene in which one car passes another at an intersection and another in which the car appeared to have been spinning.
The complainant said the advertisement depicted careless driving, such as cars taking corners at speed.
The complainant added that the drivers in the ad appeared in some cases to be distracted, such as singing loudly, and therefore not exercising due care and attention.
They believed this to be inappropriate in the context of recent deaths on Irish roads.
Dacia said in response that the ad had been approved in both France and the UK and that the ASA should therefore not find issue with it.
The ASA upheld the complaint and said it had depicted dangerous driving and unsafe practices.
While the Council found no issue with the driver who was singing loudly in the ad, it did take issue with a scene in which the car appeared to spin at speed, as “this could be imitable action”.
It also took issue with scenes of the cars “taking corners tightly and at speed”.
The ASA added that other scenes shown from the driver’s point of view depicted two shots where no hands were visible on the steering wheel.
Elsewhere, Willow Warm, a brand owned by Shamrock Renewable Products, had a complaint upheld against it but no action was required as the advertising had been amended.
The radio ad said its long-burning briquettes were “good for the environment” and “100% carbon neutral”.
Three complaints were received, with two objecting to the claim that the burning of any solid fuel could be deemed as “good for the environment”.
Another took issue with the claim that it was carbon neutral and while the complainant said the product may be sustainable to a certain extent, they questioned whether it was really carbon neutral.
In response, Shamrock Renewable Products said the claim to be “good for the environment” was intended to be viewed against the alternative use of fossil fuels such as turf, peat briquettes, coal, oil or gas.
It added that its wood contained little sulphur or nitrogen and as wood produced little ash, wood energy was clean.
They also said that the SEAI had recommended it as an alternative to fossil fuels for large parts of the population.
Regarding its carbon neutral status, Shamrock Renewable Products said its briquettes fell within international and national definitions of what defined wood as a ‘carbon neutral’ product.
The ASA upheld the complaints and noted that environmental claims should not be used without qualification unless advertisers can provide substantiation for these claims.
Both claims were later removed from the advertising and the ASA said advertisers that should ensure that evidence is to hand when highlighting the benefits of their products
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
have your say