# ASA upholds complaint on Diabetes Research & Wellness Foundation mailing

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2018/04/03/asa-upholds-complaint-diabetes-research-wellness-foundation-mailing/
- Published: 2018-04-03T09:35:53+01:00
- Author: Melanie May

**ASA has investigated and upheld three issues raised concerning a direct mail piece
from Diabetes Research & Wellness Foundation.**

The [Diabetes Research & Wellness Foundation](https://www.drwf.org.uk/) mailing 
from October 2017 encouraged recipients to return the enclosed documents for a chance
of winning a cash prize and suggested they also donated to the charity, stating 
on the envelope: “Claim your prize Sweepstakes … You have been chosen for priority
processing. Final Step Required. If you fail to respond, Diabetes Research & Wellness
Foundation cannot be responsible for loss of any prize money that you might have
won in the random drawing … Don’t miss out!”.

Following a complaint, Brent and Harrow Trading Standards challenged whether the
promotion:

## Advertisement

 [⌊Posthub advert. You create the campaign. We'll handle the postal journey. Get started at post-hub.co.uk.⌉](https://fundraising.co.uk/ads/posthub-20261007-300x250/)

 * Claimed that consumers had won a prize when they had not
 * Exaggerated consumers’ chances of winning prizes
 * Implied that consumers were luckier than they were

In response, the charity said that the mailing had gone out to existing supporters
only, and that the text used, such as “eligible for entry”, “this is your opportunity
to enter the sweepstakes” and “if you are chosen as our Grand Prize winner” did 
not categorically state that recipients were winners. They stated that they had 
used the same wording for a period of years since 2007 and had received no previous
complaints.

The charity also said that phrases used such as “winner guaranteed”, “your prize”,“
claim your prize” were to engage recipients into participating and to convey the
message that all prizes were guaranteed to be awarded after the closure of the draw
period. They stated that the programme had run biennially since 2001 and that they
had awarded prizes at the end of each two-year draw period.

They also said that participation in the prize draw did not require a contribution
to be made to the charity, and that the use of the recipient’s name was building
on the already established relationship and that it did not imply or lead to the
perception that the entrant was luckier than they were or exaggerated their chance
of winning a prize.

The charity said that the ad had been written in-house and that they were willing
to work with the ASA to ensure that in the future the ad was compliant with the 
CAP Code.

#### ASA findings

ASA [upheld all three charges](https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/diabetes-research---wellness-foundation-a17-403477.html),
ruling that the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules** **[8.19](http://www.asa.org.uk/type/capcode/code_rule/8.19.html?_vhid=9078D2859E1E38BC736CA8709F403385),
[8.20](http://www.asa.org.uk/type/capcode/code_rule/8.20.html?_vhid=9078D2859E1E38BC736CA8709F403385),
and [8.21](http://www.asa.org.uk/type/capcode/code_rule/8.21.html?_vhid=9078D2859E1E38BC736CA8709F403385)(
Prize Promotions).

Among its findings, ASA found that each document contained multiple claims which
were all phrased slightly differently which created an overall confusing and ambiguous
impression, which it considered meant that consumers could take contradictory meanings
as they read through the ad. It also considered that consumers would interpret the
claims as meaning that they had won a prize in a sweepstake that could now be claimed.

It also considered that the claims and the multiple use of the recipient’s name 
would lead the recipient to believe that they were luckier than they were and exaggerated
their chances of winning a prize, while in the context of the whole ad, consumers
could also interpret the statements regarding giving a donation to mean that by 
doing so they had a better chance of winning a prize.

ASA has told Diabetes Research and Wellness Foundation that the ad must not appear
again its current form and that they must ensure that any future ads make it clear
that consumers are being offered the opportunity to enter into a sweepstake, and
not imply that they have won a prize if they have not, or are luckier than they 
are, and must not exaggerate their chances of winning a prize.

![Loading](https://fundraising.co.uk/wp-content/plugins/page-views-count/ajax-loader-
2x.gif)