In this age of stiff competition companies often resort to market promotions which more often than not are misleading and confuse the consumers. Unfortunately in many instances and in many countries, these companies are able to go scot free due to the leniency in the laws. However, the same is not the case in United Kingdom. In UK, regulations on advertisements are under the gambit of Advertising Standards Agency. Importantly, this agency acts as an enforcer whenever the public resent the way a product is advertised and promoted.
Paddy Power Harnessed
Classic case of intervention of the Advertising Standards Agency could be the numerous shackles, the advertisement enforcing agency has placed on Paddy Power, the reputed online betting agent working with Ireland as base. Paddy Power on more than one occasion has been reined-in when the online betting agent ran campaigns with contentious natter. Paddy Power has been strictly instructed in the past not to transgress limits of public decorum in their campaigns. In fact Paddy power has had the ignominy of having to withdraw few campaigns since the promos were outlandishly hurting the sentiments of a section of the people.
William Hill Facing the Music
Latest instance of an ad campaign which has not gone down well with the public and the Advertising Standards Agency is the promotion launched by William Hill, the top online gambling service provider. The campaign which has ruffled feathers all around pertains to the marketing promotion carried out by William Hill in December 2015. Adverting Standards Agency has pulled up William Hill for coming up with a promotion which is ambiguous and likely to misrepresent factual position. Advertising Standards Agency has reprimanded William Hill and instructed them to stop any further display of the said advertisement.
William Hill’s Waterloo
The problem for William Hill surfaced when a campaign was launched declaring that wagering on few specific games were totally safe and free of any risks as bettors could get a full refund of their money even in case of losing the bet. Trouble for William Hill started when bettors were asked to place further bets in order to be eligible for the refund. The offended bettors reported the issue to the Advertising Standards Agency, who concurred with their views that the campaign was misleading as nowhere in the advertisement of William Hill this clause of eligibility was mentioned.
William Hill also had to face the wrath of a bettor who was declined refund for want of betting to a specified amount. In fact, the bettor who had staked the money initially won on betting was told that the prize money could not be considered as money invested by the bettor and that the bettor had to bring in his money to be eligible for the refund. However such arguments by William Hill were not accepted by the Adverting Standards Agency and hence William Hill was asked to withdraw the campaign and to not to indulge in any such promotions in future which were misrepresenting.