In Business news

Follow this topic

Bookmark

Record learning outcomes

The UK advertising regulator has upheld a complaint against Boots after a customer was unable to redeem their newspaper voucher for free face lotion.

In a ruling published today (August 19), the Advertising Standards Authority found that a national press ad from Boots published on March 22 this year breached a number of rules, those around ‘significant conditions’ for promotional marketing.

The ad on the front page of the Mail on Sunday stated in the headline  “FREE No7 face lotion Pick up today from Boots” with smaller text underneath stating Voucher on page 78 In store only. Subject to availability, while stocks last. Terms apply”.

The cut-out voucher included in the promotion was valid to present at No7 counters in Boots stores on Sunday March 22, with the terms and conditions stating: “Some products may only be stocked in larger Boots stores… Subject to availability, while stock lasts.”

The complaint to the ASA was brought by a customer who brought the voucher to a Boots store but was told the product – No7 Derm Solution hydrating lotion – was out of stock.

Boots told the ASA it believed it had taken “all reasonable steps” to ensure the product was available to participating customers, basing its demand forecasts on a previous six-day promotion for the same product, which retails at £22.95, and allocating supplies for individual stores according to “normal sales rates” and current stock holding.

An inventory carried out on March 23 indicated that “demand had exceeded supply overall,” with Boots arguing this showed “a reasonable estimate of demand had been made” and that therefore remedies such as a substitute product or refund were not necessary.

The chain said that it was possible some stores may have run out of the product and that in these instances staff were expected to direct customers to another store where the product was still in supply.

While the voucher included the message “take along to any Boots store,” the company suggested that in practice consumers normally redeem these vouchers at larger ‘health and beauty’ branches.

Upholding the complaint, the ASA said the CAP code states promoters are “responsible for all aspects and all stages of their promotions and must conduct them fairly and efficiently,” adding that a ‘subject to availability’ message does not negate their responsibility to “avoid causing unnecessary disappointment”.

The regulator questioned whether the stock of the product had been “distributed in a way that gave readers a fair opportunity to obtain the product from the stores they were likely to visit, particularly as they could only redeem the offer on one day”.

The ASA also flagged the absence of any system for identifying instances where customers were unable to redeem vouchers, adding: “While Boots said that stores would be expected to flag any stock-related issues, we did not consider that relying on store staff to raise issues after stock had already run low or run out, or on stock holdings in non-promotional periods, was a sufficiently robust basis on which to estimate likely consumer demand for the current promotion.”

And the strategy of referring customers to another store was inadequate in the context of a one-day promotion, the ASA found.

The regulator concluded “that the promotion had not been administered fairly and was likely to have caused participants unnecessary disappointment”.

Boots has been approached for comment.

Related: ASA upholds complaint against ‘misleading’ Boots Black Friday promotion

ASA: Online pharmacy falsely implied its ‘weight loss reviews’ page was independent