ASA Bans Coral’s Cryptic Casino Advert

The Coral Casino has recently come under the ASA’s scrutiny button because of one of its ads that tried to promote its cash out feature. The advertisement referred to the player’s ability to “blow the whistle” and stop processes whenever he liked, and it certainly implied that the person could cash out the bet at any time. Coral usually has no issues with its ads, but the consumers forged more then one complaint about it. Those complaints prompted the ASA to start investigating the commercial.
The ASA took two of the complaints and held them in high regard for the investigation. The first complaint came from a player who tried to cash out his bets many times and had come across complications more than once. The second complaint came from a person who was unable to cash out a football option only once.
Coral’s response for the first customer was that the feature becomes unavailable when certain situations are present. Those situations are when technical problems arise and when the market freezes or suspends because some unforeseen incident occurs during the football game. Coral answered the second complaint by stating that football better can request a cash out, but the availability of the cash out depends on their selections.
Coral referred both customers to the terms and conditions section on their site so that they could understand the policies and view the restrictions that they had on the features. Coral was telling the truth about the restrictions being in the terms and conditions. However, the ASA did not feel that the company presented the commercial in the best light. Coral’s ad did point to the terms and conditions in one section, but the overall theme of the ad was that consumers could cash out their bets when they wanted to.
The ASA backed the customers on the complaints for two reasons. The first reason was that it felt that Coral crafted a misleading advertisement. The ad was misleading because it led viewers to think that they could cash out at any time. The second reason that the ASA ruled against the ad was that it omitted important information, which violated BCAP 3.2. The third reason the ASA ruled against the ad was that it did not state signification limitations and qualifications. A small sentence that says “terms and conditions apply” is simply not enough to inform the customers of a feature’s limitations appropriately.
The Advertising Standards Authority is an organization that protects the interests of consumers all over the UK. The organization performs operations such as investigating complaints about UK advertisements, providing outlines and guidance for advertising media, and making decisions about adverts that are currently running. The ASA deals with advertisements on television and radio as well as material that comes inside of brochures, mail products, leaflets, press material, emails, text messages and the like. The ASA has worked on behalf of UK residents since 1961. It vowed to protect consumers from mislead ads at that time and has done so ever since.