Work From Home - Independent Homeworking Portal

Work From Home
  
arrowHome arrow Articles arrow ASA Adjudications arrow Classic Cottages Saturday, 06 September 2008  
Main Menu
Home
Forum
Articles
Homeworking Links & Wholesalers
Contact Us
Advertise on WFHN
Who's Online
We have 26 guests online
Work From Home Newsflash
Want to Work from Home? Why not take two minutes to visit out new and improved forum at http://www.workfromhomeforums.net and talk to other homeworkers...


Classic Cottages PDF Print E-mail

Classic Cottages
32 Nantwich Road
Wrenbury
Nantwich
Cheshire
CW5 8EN

Complaint:

Objection from the National Group on Homeworking to a specialist magazine advertisement and follow-up literature for homeworkers. a. The advertisement was headlined "Homeworkers Required" and stated "Work from home casting and painting miniature cottages or producing rubber latex moulds.

Good rates of pay. SAE for free details." b. The follow-up literature stated "...we urgently require people to work from home..." and "Most of our Homeworkers usually earn between £3.00 and £7.50 per hour" and invited recipients to order kits and materials for making cottages priced between £10 and £220. A separate sheet headed "AGENTS WANTED" stated "You could earn £150.00 per week on our 25% commission plan...". The complainants: 1. objected that the advertisement did not state that an initial investment was required; 2. questioned the availability of work; and 3. questioned whether the earnings claims in the follow-up literature were accurate.

 

Codes Section: 3.1, 7.1, 54.4d, 54.4f (Ed 10)

Adjudication:


1. Complaint upheld The advertisers explained that after an informal enquiry from the Authority they had called their publishers and asked them to include the words "small initial outlay" in their advertisements. They sent documentary evidence that showed similar wording had been included in an advertisement in Diamond Freeads from the end of June 2000. The advertisers maintained that, because of an oversight by them and the publishers, the advertisement had been published without the new wording. They said they believed the advertisement would be amended in the next issue of the magazine. The publishers said the advertisers had, after receiving the new complaint, asked them to amend the advertisement. The Authority concluded that the advertisement had breached the Codes by not stating the level of initial investment required and welcomed the advertisers' assurance that the advertisement would be amended.

2. Complaint not upheld The advertisers sent documentary evidence showing recent payments made to homeworkers. The Authority concluded that work was available.

3. Complaint upheld The advertisers sent documentary evidence showing recent payments made to homeworkers. The payments were between £39.40 and £71.30. Because the advertisers had not shown that they paid the full range of hourly rates of pay and piece rates of pay advertised in their follow-up literature and had not supported their claim of weekly earnings for homeworkers or agents, the Authority concluded that the earnings claims were not accurate. The Authority asked the advertisers to amend their follow-up literature with help from the Committee of Advertising Practice Copy Advice team.

 

<Previous   Next>
Top 10 Articles
Sponsored Links

Cooking Forum
Work from Home Opportunities
Work From Home Blog
Advertise Here
Advertise Here
Advertise Here
Advertise Here
top of page


Mambo is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL License.