News 

The advert in question was set in a bakery where the manager was receiving a number of trivial calls, with the voice over proclaiming 'Like most small firms, we have to make dozens of absolutely vital calls everyday'...

What Tiscali objected to was use of the word 'free' when the advert claimed 'Those mobile calls we make to the people we work with, wouldn't it help if they were free? With Vodafone Perfect Fit For Business, they are. Vodafone. Free calls between your company mobiles'. According to Tiscali, the claim was misleading because the price of the calls was included in the monthly fee charged as part of Vodafone's Perfect Fit for Business price plan.

The

ADVERTISEMENT

complaint was upheld by the ASA, which considered that internal calls between company
mobiles were 'inclusive' rather than 'free', so it concluded that the claim was misleading.

The ASA been moved to dispose on the meaning of 'free'. Broadcast code rules had, until now, been interpreted to allow use of the word free to describe elements of a package - for example an Internet service - that are included for an overall sum of money but for which no extra charge is made.

Following the Vodafone ruling, however, the interpretation will change. It will be acceptable to say there is no additional cost to the customer for a package-element that is included in the package price, but not that the element is free.

For television ads, it declares: 'Advertisements must not describe an offer as 'free' if there are costs to consumers other than actual postage or carriage, non-premium rate telephone charges or reasonable travel required to collect the offer. Advertising must make clear the extent of the consumer's liability for any costs.'

You can read the full ruling in a PDF on the ASA website.