Principal Hotels has been ordered to clarify the difference between rooms offered in a 16th century mansion house and those in a separate training centre.
The advertising watchdog upheld a complaint against the company after a consumer challenged whether the main guest room listings for De Vere Horsley Estate were misleading because they did not make clear that these rooms were away from the manor in a management centre.
The Advertising Standards Authority today banned the online advert and ruled that Principal Hotels must “prominently state if rooms were not in the mansion house”.
Upholding the complaint, the ASA noted that the advert seen last September featured the headline ‘De Vere Horsley Estate. A striking 19th century mansion house in the heart of the Surrey countryside’ alongside a large photo of the mansion house.
“In the absence of additional information to indicate otherwise, we considered consumers would understand that, should they make a booking, they would stay in the advertised mansion house,” the ASA said.
“We noted a series of images under the tab ‘Rooms’ found at the top of the website’s home page, provided descriptions of the hotel’s guest rooms and stated that they were located in Horsley Place, which we understood was separate to the advertised mansion house.
“However, we considered that text was not particularly prominent and consumers were unlikely to understand without further information that Horsley Place was separate to the mansion house.
“We noted there were no images of Horsley Place attached to the guest room listing and there was only one external picture on the website, which was a bird’s eye view that also included the mansion house.
“Although Horsley Place was mentioned in a caption beneath the photo, it was not clear which building it referred to and there were no photos of what the building looked like from the ground.
“Because the majority of photos on the website were of the mansion house, with no external photos of Horsley Place beyond the bird’s eye photo and limited indication that the guest rooms were not located in the mansion house, we considered that consumers would understand that the guest rooms would be in the mansion house.
“Because that was not the case, we concluded the ad was likely to mislead.”
Principal Hotel Company told the ASA that the website’s booking engine “clearly stated” where each room type was located – the Towers or the adjacent management centre, Horsley Place – and the main guest room listing clearly stated in the first line of the room description that it was “located within our adjacent training centre”.
This was also prominently stated on the ‘Rooms’ sub-section of the website, according to the company.
Principal said it would add an additional qualification to the home page: “When it’s time to unwind, our collection of modern bedrooms await, whether you choose to stay in the historic towers or the contemporary Horsley Place.”
The company agreed during the ASA investigation to amend its advertising to include emboldened text alongside each of the room listings that stated the room type locations and on the website’s booking engine.