ASA Issues a Ruling on Paul Coleman’s VIP Inner Circle

The Advertising Standards Authority issued a ruling today regarding the text of an ad appearing on Paul Coleman’s website. The texts relate to advertising a money-back guarantee and suggest that gambling may provide an alternative to employment, which according to the ASA breaches CAP Code Rules.

ASA Reveals a Ruling Regarding an Online Ad

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) issued a ruling today regarding content that appeared on a tipster website www.private-syndicate.co.uk. Consequently, the Authority asked Paul Coleman not to make “claims that they offered a money-back guarantee if they were unable to do so”.

Furthermore, the tipster must ensure that their advertisements are presented in a socially responsible way. Such a way must not suggest that gambling is an alternative to employment or an easy way to gain financial security.

This is Coleman’s third ruling issued by the ASA for the last few years. Before this ruling, the ASA issued another one over irresponsible gambling advertising last year in June. Furthermore, another ruling dates back to June 2015.

The Authority Found Multiple Breaches of CAP Code Rules

The sanction came after a complainant who was a member of the “VIP Inner Circle Service” for several months made no profit. Consequently, the complainant challenged the website’s claim of “100% Lifetime Money-Back Guarantee” and whether that statement was misleading, considering that they were not refunded the money after having requested it.

Furthermore, the ASA looked into the advertisement text for the “VIP Inner Circle“. “All I want to do is prove that there is a genuine way to make you easy tax-free money,” reads part of the text. Additionally, the activity was advertised as a “second or first income betting on horses”, which again caught the attention of the Authority.

Consequently, the ASA ruled that the “money-back guarantee” ad breaches CAP Code rules 3.1, 3.53, and 3.55. Rule 3.1 relates to misleading advertising, 3.53 prohibits the use of the word “guarantee” within marketing materials which may confuse. Finally, rule 3.55 refers to refunds related to consumers who claim a money-back guarantee.

Additionally, the ASA found that the ad was socially irresponsible. The Authority said that the ad breached CAP Code rule 1.3, which requests marketing communication to be “prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society“.

Coleman Agrees to Comply with the ASA Ruling

In response to the ASA ruling, Coleman revealed that he thought that the complainant had received their refund. Furthermore, he stressed that he had always processed promptly requests made by consumers who wanted a refund. Coleman added that many clients are satisfied with his service and have collaborated with him for many years without any complaints.

Regarding the advice which was given by ASA, Coleman said that he would comply and remove the guarantee claims from his website. Although he responded to the ruling regarding the guarantee terms of the ad, Coleman did not respond to the ASA’s ruling regarding the social responsibility of the ad.