ASA Complaint Upheld Against Cassava 0

Posted on 9, May 2013

in Category Bingo News


Cassava is a name many bingo players will know through big name brands like Foxy, Costa, Wink and of course, all the Dragonfish networked brands. Recently the Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) received a complaint about Lucky Ace Poker regarding an advertisement on a social networking site which stated “Join Now & Get £10 Free to play with!”.

The complainant suggested that the advert was misleading as he signed up with Lucky Ace Poker and did not receive the £10 free bonus.

In response to the complaint the site said that the advert, as with all their promotions, was subject to clear, published terms and conditions. The terms and conditions, which could be viewed on the Lucky Ace Poker website, stated "entry to the promotion is available only to persons over the age of 18 who do not have any previous account with the promoter".” Lucky Ace Poker then went on to state that the complainant had not received the advertised bonus as both he and his girlfriend had accounts with other brands.

However, this response was not enough to appease the ASA and the complaint was upheld because the advert made no reference to the existence of terms and conditions or pointed the end user in the direction of where to find them.

The ad was found to breach the following CAP Codes and cannot be shown again in its current form:

3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so

3.9
Marketing communications must state significant limitations and qualifications. Qualifications may clarify but must not contradict the claims that they qualify.

8.17.1
How to participate, including significant conditions and costs, and other major factors reasonably likely to influence consumers’ decision or understanding about the promotion

8.2
Promoters must conduct their promotions equitably, promptly and efficiently and be seen to deal fairly and honourably with participants and potential participants. Promoters must avoid causing unnecessary disappointment.

You can read the full adjudication here.

0 Comments