|
|
Post by heofgreatwisdom on Mar 26, 2009 10:56:33 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by trainplanner on Mar 26, 2009 12:45:31 GMT
I raised a query with the advertising standards agency about this a while back. Then i got a brush off letter saying that consideration had been given and the advertising on thier website was not in breach.
Funny how a website cannot be in breach, but the printed stuff can?? Either way now it is offical, the journey time savings are not what they are claimed to be.
What has surprised me was the comment that it was acceptable to include stopping as well as non stopping times in calculating the average for the morning peak. As i understand most people do not get on the stopper if they can get the fast, perfering the quicker journey time over the slow, unless i have missed something???
Peoples thoughts??
TP
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Trevithick on Mar 26, 2009 13:02:28 GMT
Why was the "punishment" only an instruction not to reuse the ad? Surely they should have been forced to produce a new ad stating that the previous one was a work of fiction and the REAL times are below...?
What would happen if SET ignored the ban? Would they get taken to court, or would the apparently toothless ASA just politely ask them again not to be so naughty?
RT
|
|
|
|
Post by trainplanner on Mar 27, 2009 16:08:47 GMT
Mr Trevithick, If the ban is ignored then i believe the ASA has powers to fine the offender and legally demand the removal of the add. If this instruction is not complied with, then they can refer the matter directly to court, where a bigger fine can be imposed.
Regards
TP
|
|
