Description:
In September, a snow removal company sent a mailer to the complainant’s house. The correspondence included the recipient’s name, the billing address, the price for a double driveway, dates and detailed taxes. The mailer was titled ‘’Snow Removal Contract’’ and included a contract number and payment options.
Complaint:
The complainant submitted that there was nothing in the mailer to indicate that it was an advertisement. In their view, the mailer was misleading because it gave the impression that they had an existing contract with the company and were being invoiced for services. The complainant called the advertiser to confirm whether a contract had in fact been established.
Response:
In its response to Council, the advertiser confirmed that the complainant did not have a contract with the company and that the mailer was, in fact, an advertisement for their services. The advertiser explained that the software used to generate the mailer automatically includes the word “contract” and does not allow for customization. They also noted that this software is commonly used by other snow removal companies. The advertiser further submitted that the inclusion of a $50 rebate for new customers clarifies that the mailer was not a renewal for the Complainant’s address.
Decision:
Council appreciated the advertiser’s response, and considered the complaint together with the advertiser’s response.
Council found that the general impression conveyed by the mailer was that the recipient had already entered into a binding agreement with the advertiser. The presentation and the wording gave the appearance of existing contract, rather than an advertisement or a promotional offer. Nowhere in the mailer was it disclosed that it was an advertisement. In Council’s view, the failure to clearly identify the mailer as advertising material was misleading.
Given the ad omitted relevant information and was presented in a format/style that concealed the fact it was an advertisement. Council unanimously came to the conclusion that the advertisement contravened Clause 1(b) and Clause 2 of the Code.
Infraction:
Clause 1(b) and Clause 2
