IRELAND’S ADVERTISING WATCHDOG has upheld six complaints recently investigated by the organisation, including those made against An Post, FreeNow, and Emerald Park.

The Advertising Standards Authority for Ireland is financed by the advertising industry and promotes the highest standards of advertising, promotional marketing, and direct marketing.

It aims to ensure that all commercial marketing is “legal, decent, honest and truthful”.

In the case of An Post, a complaint was made against an online advert on its website which outlined a postage option costing €4.50, with a delivery timeframe of 2-3 working days for worldwide delivery.

A person complained that they had posted 100 letters to the Netherlands via this postal option but 20 days later, the letters had not been delivered.

The complainant said they contacted An Post and were advised that the delivery times on the website were only an indication of the postage time frame and that this was outlined in the terms and conditions on the website.

The complaint said these terms and conditions were not mentioned on the website.

The ASAI concluded that the advert was misleading.

While the ASAI noted the delivery times were estimates, it considered that the “overall impression created by the advertising was that post would be delivered within the advertised time frame”.

A complaint about a misleading FreeNow advert on the potential earnings of drivers was also upheld.

The advert featured on the side of buses, as well as on Instagram.

The Instagram ad read: “EARN UP TO €1,300 a WEEK. FREENOW Take full control of your time and your earnings. Drive your way to €1,300 a week”.

Over 30 complaints were received about this ad, the majority of which were from taxi driver who said the earning potential mentioned was misleading and not achievable.

They added that it gave a false impression that those working in the taxi industry were earning more than they were and that it would not be possible to earn this amount without working additional hours.

The complaints also noted that no reference was made to whether this €1,300 figure took additional costs into account, such as fuel and licence fees.

In 2022, around 7% of drivers on the FreeNow platform earned €1,300 a week.

FreeNow said in response that any driver using its platform is a sole trader and FreeNow is not in a position to calculate what expenses or outgoings a driver may have.

The ASAI said the “fact that only 7% had earned that amount (or more) was material information that should have been referenced in the advertisement” and that without this qualification, the advert was in breach of the code.

However, the ASAI only upheld in part complaints related to the fact that FreeNow did not make it clear that the ‘up to’ figure would have to take account driver deductions.

A complaint against a social media advert for Emerald Park was also upheld.

The ad showcased a promotional code which entitled users to a 24% discount on admissions to Emerald Park over a period of several weeks, but terms and conditions were not referenced.

Four complaints were received from people who had tried to avail of the discount but were told it was no longer available.

One complainant was told the promotion had ceased around halfway through the advertised campaign.

Emerald Park said the terms and conditions noted that the promotion may be withdrawn at any time and that it reserves the right to change the terms and conditions at any time.

The ASAI said measures should be taken to “avoid causing unnecessary disappointment for consumers” and that the advertising had not indicated there was a limited availability on the number of visitors who could avail of the discount code.

Elsewhere, a complaint was upheld against Castleblayney Credit Union for an online ad that referred to a “Members only car draw”.

A complainant said the ad was misleading because “there was no car available to those who won the draw”.

Castleblayney Credit Union said the “prize provided funds towards the cost of a new car”, a sum of €16,000.

The ASAI upheld the complaint and deemed it is misleading because the prize was a cash prize, as opposed to a car.

A complaint was also upheld in relation to a various social media ads from Intrepid Spirits.

Two of the ads referenced how a canned cocktail could help with “awkward” questions or moments over Christmas, and the complainant said it was “dangerous and inappropriate to portray alcohol as a tool for social anxiety”.

Intrepid Spirits said it was “attempting to present a familiar situation to their audience in which their consumers could relate to”.

The complaint was upheld because the main voice over referred to the situation as “awkward Christmas moments” and that the product “could help”.

The ASAI considered the adverts had portrayed an alcohol product as a way of helping with the interactions portrayed.

It also upheld a complaint that the posts did not include responsibility messaging and used people who appeared under 25 in the adverts.

Meanwhile, complaints against a Phonewatch radio advert were partly upheld.

The ad claimed a Phonewatch alarm would make a home “four times more secure” and referenced an offer that was ending soon.

Three complaints were received, with complaints being made against the “four times more secure claim” and the fact that “no timeline was given” for the ending ‘soon’ offer.

In response, Phonewatch issued CSO data on the burglary rates of homes in 2022 and compared this figure to their own alarm rates.

It also said Phonewatch runs equipment offers all year round and the offer end dates were stated on their website.

The ASAI upheld the complaint against the “four times more secure” because the evidence cited was not sufficient and could likely mislead.

However, the ASAI didn’t uphold the complaint on the “ending soon” aspect of the advert and said the ad was not “likely to induce consumers to rush to make a purchase they would otherwise not have done”.