ASA rules against Magpas 'night and day' service ads 5

Fundraising | Celina Ribeiro | 12 Sep 2012

The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld a complaint against ads by Magpas made by fellow air ambulance service, the East Anglian Air Ambulance.

The East Anglian Air Ambulance had objected to two banners, which appeared in various locations in the region, and copy on the Magpas website to the effect that Magpas could respond to a crisis call within 30 minutes at any time of night or day in the East of England. One of the banners read: “Saving Lives Night and Day” and “Your night time air ambulance service”.

The ASA has agreed with the complaints by the East Anglian Air Ambulance that these adverts were likely to mislead consumers. It argued that Magpas was not the primary air ambulance in all the regions in which the ads appeared, and that it could not back claims to be available at any time of night.

Magpas responded with evidence that it was at the time the only air ambulance service available at night time in the UK; aviation rules restrict civilian aircraft during the night time, but the charity had an agreement with the local police force which meant it could use their helicopters between 1am and 7am. The charity also demonstrated that it had attended incidents in all of the 13 primary care trusts in the East of England and that its flight times showed it had attended the incidents within 30 minutes.

However, the ASA judged the advertisements to be misleading and ordered the charity not to repeat them in their current form. The regulator felt that the data provided did not sufficiently show that Magpas is able to provide doctors on helicopters to people in need at any time of day in East of England.

A spokeswoman for Magpas said that the organisation has dealt with all the communications with the ASA.

Place a comment

Arthur Balls
Vet
22 Sep 2012

So Rowan James strikes again.

Strange how his name appears in so many different places on behalf of MAGPAS and elsewhere.

MAGPAS should accept that they have been caught lying and that they should question the integrity of their leaders. I wouldn't support a charity that misleads the public.

[Reply]

Rowan James
Paramedic
17 Sep 2012

You miss the point - none of the Air Ambulance Charities actually do what they say they do on their websites!

And if you read the detail on the ASA website, it seems that they were able to substantiate the generality of their claims - just not the detail that the ASA wanted - something I think all Air Ambulance charities would struggle with.

And of course it should matter if a competitor complains - they have motive. I wouldn't be surprised if we see a counter claim similarly upheld in the next few weeks!

Rowan

[Reply]

Alistair Heron
21 Sep 2012
Response to [Rowan James]

But Rowan, if a competitor makes a complaint that is without foundation then it won't be upheld. They shouldn't be barred from making a complaint if it's a valid one.

[Reply]

Alistair Heron
13 Sep 2012

I wouldn't pretend to know the rights and wrongs of this particular situation. However, surely the only important consideration is whether or not it could be substantiated. The fact that it was made by a competitor seems to me entirely irrelevant.

[Reply]

Rowan James
Paramedic
13 Sep 2012

It's very sad that these competing charities have resorted to complaining about each other. It seems to me that all of the air ambulance organisations should be worried now... as they all project themselves perhaps a bit further than they can evidence. Very sad.

I note that a complaint made to the ASA about East Anglian Air Ambulance in January was 'informally resolved' - shame we don't get to see the details of that. I suspect tit-for-tat complaints.

It's also interesting that the ASA have pursued an investigation on a complaint made by a competitor. I suspect we shall see more of this.

As I said, very sad.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.