- Joined
- Feb 25, 2011
- Messages
- 338
The only witch hunt and victimisation is by a group of members on this forum against Bid Shopping.
Bid victimised by asa
- Thread starter bingowings
- Start date
Help Support ShoppingTelly:
Paul_s
tea and cake
Can you categorically state that all the ASA complaints against Bid have been from here (and it doesn't really matter as no one has forced the ASA to uphold any complaints unless you are saying there is some form of corruption going on)? Again, and I said this to Bingowings (Who hasn't replied) - where's your evidence to back up what you're saying? We have plently of video evidence to support our complaints (and no, I've not made any myself against Bid).
I really don't get why Bingowings has posted this thread... as it will jeopardize any complaint he/she has about the ASA!! if there are some form of double standards going on then surely BW should be taking this up directly with the ASA or even Ofcom?
Last edited:
Hillary
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2012
- Messages
- 414
I have to agree about ASA. I made a complaint once but not about a shopping channel. It seemed to be dismissed as irrelevant whilst another, in the same vein as mine, was upheld. Like you, I couldn't understand the way their minds work.
Re: the situps postage and packaging. I think you would agree that in the past it has been shown in such miniscule lettering that it could be easily missed. At least these days it is easier to see. So the firm should get a pat on the back for that, even though the cost is still exorbitant.
Re: the situps postage and packaging. I think you would agree that in the past it has been shown in such miniscule lettering that it could be easily missed. At least these days it is easier to see. So the firm should get a pat on the back for that, even though the cost is still exorbitant.
There is a difference with Bid because, unlike any other shopping channel, their P+P charges are often almost 800% more than the item price (£1 item), sometimes almost 8000% more (1p item). And unfortunately Bid were no doubt told to be more clear because i'm sure you will remember they used to suggest you could buy nine, £1 items 'for less than a tenner' without once mentioning P+P, which would bring the purchase to over £80.
This complaint gives an insight into how they used to behave, i'm afraid you reap what you sow.
http://www.asa.org.uk/Rulings/Adjudications/2013/2/sit_up-Ltd/SHP_ADJ_212294.aspx
Last edited:
Talking about other shopping channels I have made at least 10 purchases on Ideal World using flexipay and i'm almost certain they always said 'make your first payment today plus your P+P' although I obviously cannot say they confirm that each time.
However, it's worth noting that reading through the Ideal World forums there dosen't seem to be any big issue with presenters misleading customers regarding P+P. I know people were a bit shocked at being charged £15 for a months supply of diet meals and there were some issues with the 'Postage Payback' promotion but as far as I can see that's about it. (Of course they appear to have order fulfillment problems as highlighted on Watchdog but that's another matter, thankfully Sit Up don't have such issues).
Of course i'm happy to be corrected if I have missed anything but i'm sure the guys on that forum would shout up if there was a major problem, they are pretty vocal (and quite right too!).
Last edited:
bingowings
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- May 31, 2013
- Messages
- 502
When did it become the ASA's remit to rule on 'value for money'?. It's just preposterous! BID TV have the most expensive delivery charge. But how can the ASA take that into consideration when ruling on an advert being misleading? They are two very separate issues. The question of 'should BID TV have to verbally mention and incorporate the delivery and call charge for each product' has been discussed to death on here. And as BID now do that, which I imagine is damaging to their figures suggests their hand was forced by the ASA. The issue is NOT with the 'value' offered by the delivery charge, it's the fact that the price quoted is NOT the actual TOTAL paid by the customer. Regardless of how much. It could be 1p delivery. If it is not mentioned then the presenter is not giving an actual total! Personally I think this rule is daft as the price and delivery are separate. The ASA agrees, but only when it is for OTHER channels! Regardless of what you think of BIDs delivery charge you have to admit this is double standards.
I can only speak for myself but while I think the P+P rates that Bid charge are steep I wouldn't dream of complaining about it, that would be silly. But, as detailed in the complaint I linked to above, Bid had a very nasty habit of saying things like "You only pay the price we stop at", "… that's it, fiver" and "… for a pound, you can't get a kids' plastic sweetie ring for that can you" (direct quotes from the ASA Website) and even worse suggesting you could buy nine items for just £9 when in fact the cost to the purchaser would be over £80.
However, I am very open minded on this subject. If anyone can provide evidence that other shopping channels have made similar claims (i.e. Upheld ASA Compalints and multiple posts in the Ideal World, QVC and the various Jewellery Channel forums) then I will be more than happy to say it is a widespread problem that should be dealt with.
Unfortunately I honestly cannot see any such evidence, either when I watch other channels, on the ASA website or in the forums I mentioned.
just watch ideal world just because there forum do not see it as a cause of complaint does not mean it does not happen
it is irrelevant whether the p +p is 1p or £100 it is not the ASA to judge whether p+p is to high but it seems they want to judge bid or mentioning it but not others?
it is irrelevant whether the p +p is 1p or £100 it is not the ASA to judge whether p+p is to high but it seems they want to judge bid or mentioning it but not others?
bingowings
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- May 31, 2013
- Messages
- 502
Statements like "all you pay is" are clearly wrong. But stating the price on screen and putting the onscreen price into perspective by mentioning other products you could buy for that price, is common place on pretty much every channel. The difference is BID HAS to factor in their delivery charge while others don't! I'm surprised you don't see this Wirral to be honest. The ASA clearly see the price and postage as 2 separate entities as far as other channels are concerned. But have made an acception for BID. And I can't see a reason other than BIDS high price which is crazy! By that standard anyone that charges MORE for something than someone else should receive warning from the ASA. Maybe in Cuba this would be acceptable but not in a capitalist country like ours. The ASA havE no right to judge on 'value' it's simply not their job!
As I mentioned earlier I genuinely see no evidence that other channels completely disregard P+P. And I definitely see no evidence to suggest they are (at best) disingenuous about what the customer will actually pay in regard to Multibuys as Bid regularly and flagrantly have in the past which has no doubt caused the ASA to be more strict with them. However, because of this regulatory intervention it is pleasing to see they don't behave like that anymore but answer me this Bing, if the ASA hadn't acted do you think Bid would have stopped such antics?. If other channels behaved like that I would imagine there would be lot's of evidence to support that notion but as far as I can see there isn't.
However, should you provide such evidence I will of course be sympathetic to your opinion. I cannot be fairer than that Bings :happy:
Last edited:
bingowings
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- May 31, 2013
- Messages
- 502
The biggest issue with the response from the ASA is their declaration that a statement was 'subjective and the opinion of the person and not the channel' how many of BIDS complaints would be removed if that principle was applied to them?
Maybe write a letter to the ASA and ask them?
And do let us know what they say, i'd be intrigued to know :happy:
bingowings
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- May 31, 2013
- Messages
- 502
I seldom hear anyone mentioning postage on other channels. But I do hear them referi g only to the price. Bid mention the postage in EVERY sale. They are clearly being punished beyond that of other channels. Even a blind man can see this! But maybe not a biased blind man.
bingowings
Registered Shopper
- Joined
- May 31, 2013
- Messages
- 502
So would I (sorry about the blind biased comment too much coffee) I get the feeling that they will apply the letter of the law to a retailer who receives lots of complaint! Otherwise it's a different set of rules and they are tolerant of misleading behaviour. This is surely wrong as anyone could gather a group of people together and focus their attention on scrutinising a channel. I just don't see how the opinions of the presenter can represent the opinions of bid. But not at gems?
I genuinely see your point of view, honestly I do. But just take a moment to remember the way they behaved just 6-9 months ago and try and understand the action the ASA has taken, which has literally been forced on them. Much like the referral to OFCOM was forced on them.
Their behaviour at times was an abomination and not just regarding P+P. They exaggerated the heritage of multiple 'brands' (and that is being generous), they blatantly suggested jewellery was way more valuable than it actually is then deleted facebook posts when buyers got the pieces valued, they repeatedly said a no name fragrance was not only advertised on USTV (going so far to show an incredibly unprofessional video) but that it is sold in top American Department Stores and even said it could be on sale in Debenhams soon, one presenter in particular conveniently forgot to mention that 'gold' rings were actually gold plated rings, they even said on more than one occasion that a cheap Tablet Computer came preloaded with full versions of very expensive software and they didn't.
And to cap that all off they even said on one particular day their '£10 Free Credit' could be withdrawn at any point in the day and urged (actually pressurised is more accurate) customers that they 'must buy right now' when the T&C's on the website categorically proved the offer went on until 0130 the next day. I have genuinely never witnessed such behaviour from any other current channels and people had simply had enough, resulting in the complaints.
They got away with it for years Bingo, no more though. I truly believe that Sit Up are deserving of special attention, it is of their own making.
Last edited:
PJ.
In an Ideal World ...
Before Amazon came along with free delivery people expect to pay a fair price for delivery so they don't have to shout about £4 p&p but £8 IMHO they should.
PJ
Goodluckifyageddit
Registered Shopper
Agree with this completely. If some on this forum and other members of the public hadn't taken a stand against the outrageous behaviour by certain presenters it would have carried on and probably got worse. If nothing else it has proved that when consumers take a stand it can help drive standards up - Bid are by no means perfect yet, but a lot better than they used to be. I can't vouch for the stance taken by other channels as I don't watch them.
I don't know about the ASA - personally I've never lodged a complaint with them. I was treated somewhat shoddily by Ofcom a few years ago when I complained about the appalling rip-off quizzes being run by Cellcast - the ones where you had to identify a celebrity and they would have obviously fake callers ring in with ludicrous suggestions for answers. I made a complaint when a huge jackpot was 'won' - unfortunately for them the presenter's mic was left on and you could clearly hear her say "Was that your friend who rang in?" to the producer/director when she thought she was off air. Despite providing all the details nothing was done ! So I had a bad experience with them. If Bingo is so concerned about it not being a level playing field perhaps he/she should rally other viewers on this board to the cause - maybe strength in numbers helps when it comes to complaining to the ASA - It might be worth a shot.
I cannot say with total conviction that these sort of shenanigans don't occur on other channels, all I can say (with total honesty) is that I haven't seen anything remotely approaching it.
And in the absence of any tangible evidence (i'd like to think I have been able to provide many specific examples of wrongdoing) I have to say i'm somewhat sceptical as to whether it has.
So I can only conclude that this is why Sit Up might be getting treated differently but in my opinion they almost certainly deserve to be. I guess all will become much clearer when OFCOM report their findings.
