Jump to content

Showing results for tags 'glamour'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • The Consumer Forums: The Mall
    • Welcome to the Consumer Forums
    • FAQs
    • Forum Rules - Please read before posting
    • Consumer Forums website - Post Your Questions & Suggestions about this site
    • Helpful Organisations
    • The Bear Garden – for off-topic chat
  • CAG Community centre
    • CAG Community Centre Subforums:-
  • Consumer TV/Radio Listings
    • Consumer TV and Radio Listings
  • CAG Library - Please register
    • CAG library Subforums
  • Banks, Loans & Credit
    • Bank and Finance Subforums:
    • Other Institutions
  • Retail and Non-retail Goods and Services
    • Non-Retail subforums
    • Retail Subforums
  • Work, Social and Community
    • Work, Social and Community Subforums:
  • Debt problems - including homes/ mortgages, PayDay Loans
    • Debt subforums:
    • PayDay loan and other Short Term Loans subforum:
  • Motoring
    • Motoring subforums
  • Legal Forums
    • Legal Issues subforums

Categories

  • News from the National Consumer Service
  • News from the Web

Blogs

  • A Say in the Life of .....
  • Debt Diaries

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Location

Found 1 result

  1. Ad A promotion on Glamour Heaven's Facebook page stated "MASSIVE ANNIVERSARY GIVEAWAY … WE ARE GIVING AWAY THIS STUNNING MINI COOPER. FOR A CHANCE TO WIN SIMPLY SHARE THIS PHOTO AND LIKE OUR PAGE". Issue The complainant challenged whether the promotion was genuine. CAP Code (Edition 12) 3.18.18.2 Response Glamour Heaven did not respond to the ASA's enquiries. Assessment Upheld The ASA was concerned by lack of substantive response and apparent disregard for the Code from Glamour Heaven, which was a breach of CAP Code rule 1.7 (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to provide a substantive response to our enquiries and told them to do so in future. We had not seen any evidence that that prize was genuine or that it had been awarded to an entrant, we therefore concluded it was misleading. The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 8.1 and 8.2 (Sales promotions). Action The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Glamour Heaven to ensure their promotions were genuine. We referred the matter to CAP's Compliance team.
×
×
  • Create New...