ASA Adjudication on Hutchison 3G UK Ltd RE:Ultrafast term used is misleading
We considered that because the claim "Our Ultrafast network is built for more" immediately followed the statement "4G is nice" it would be understood by consumers as a comparison between Three's network and those networks offering 4G, which we understood was only Everything Everywhere at the time the ad appeared. The CAP Code required that comparisons with identifiable competitors were not misleading and must objectively compare one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative feature of those products. We considered that the claims implied that Three's network offered specific technological advantages over those from Everything Everywhere, that would be of benefit to consumers. The ad qualified the claim with the statement "our Ultrafast network is built to give you all-you-can-eat-data" but we had not seen any evidence that the offering of all-you-can-eat data plans by Three was the result of technological capabilities of their network beyond those of Everything Everywhere. We also considered the unclear basis for the claim meant that it was not verifiable by consumers. We concluded the claim "Our Ultrafast network is built for more" was misleading and had not been substantiated.
On this point ads (a) and (b) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification), 3.11 (exaggeration) and 3.33 and 3.35 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors).
Action
The ads must not appear again in their current form. We told Three to ensure that claims did not mislead and that comparative claims complied with the requirements of the Code.
http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2014/1/Hutchison-3G-UK-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_235384.aspx
Reason enough to cancel contract ?
We considered that because the claim "Our Ultrafast network is built for more" immediately followed the statement "4G is nice" it would be understood by consumers as a comparison between Three's network and those networks offering 4G, which we understood was only Everything Everywhere at the time the ad appeared. The CAP Code required that comparisons with identifiable competitors were not misleading and must objectively compare one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative feature of those products. We considered that the claims implied that Three's network offered specific technological advantages over those from Everything Everywhere, that would be of benefit to consumers. The ad qualified the claim with the statement "our Ultrafast network is built to give you all-you-can-eat-data" but we had not seen any evidence that the offering of all-you-can-eat data plans by Three was the result of technological capabilities of their network beyond those of Everything Everywhere. We also considered the unclear basis for the claim meant that it was not verifiable by consumers. We concluded the claim "Our Ultrafast network is built for more" was misleading and had not been substantiated.
On this point ads (a) and (b) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification), 3.11 (exaggeration) and 3.33 and 3.35 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors).
Action
The ads must not appear again in their current form. We told Three to ensure that claims did not mislead and that comparative claims complied with the requirements of the Code.
http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2014/1/Hutchison-3G-UK-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_235384.aspx
Reason enough to cancel contract ?
Last edited:
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
