Superdrug's claim that it sold 960 everyday health and beauty products more cheaply than rival chemist Boots was misleading, the advertising watchdog has ruled.
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) found that not all 960 of the products in question were cheaper at Superdrug than Asda, that they were not all health and beauty products or 'everyday' objects, and that the pricing information used as the basis for the comparison was out of date.
Superdrug published two adverts in the national press which claimed that of 1,048 products it checked, 960 were cheaper at its shops than at Boots.
Boots complained about the accuracy of the pricing information used, and about the description of the goods as everyday health and beauty products, calling into question the price or description of 206 of the 960 products claimed to be cheaper at Superdrug.
"Boots also asserted that their own list of 'everyday health and beauty products', which they compared with Superdrug every week, contained 974 health and beauty lines for [price collection dates] 7 to 9 January 2008 of which only 175 appeared on Superdrug's list," said the ASA ruling. "Boots believed the list of products used to compare prices had been carefully selected by Superdrug in order to be able to make the best claim possible, rather than creating a list representing true 'everyday health and beauty' products."
This article was contributed to ITproportal.com by http://www.OUT-LAW.com.
OUT-LAW.COM is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.
See: http://www.out-law.com for further details.
