There’s a lot to be said for covering your bases – just ask sports betting giant, William Hill. The company recently escaped penalties by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) when it successfully stated its defence against the accusations on the part of a bettor, that one of the company’s aired World Cup advertisements had been purposefully misleading.
The person who had lodged the complaint was a long-term William Hill customer and had taken issue with an advertisement that had aired on July 8th, 2018. According to the complainant, the advertisement had included a statement that two extra bet boosts would be available to bettors for the duration of this year’s World Cup. The bettor then went on to say that after only 9 days into the tournament, he was no longer able to take advantage of the promotion. To his mind, the company was guilty of false advertising.
William Hill, however, responded to the complaint lodged with the ASA by explaining that in this particular case, the bettor had reached his overall limit as far as special promotions were concerned. It just so happened that this had transpired during the tournament in question.
According to company policy, which is explained in detail on the company’s website, bettors are limited to a specified number of promotions during the lifetime of an online account. The bettor in question had already previously been found guilty of abusing the promotions system, and was informed of the fact on June 23rd, 2018, which was of course days before the advertisement had been aired.
All things considered, the ASA investigated the complainant’s allegations and found that the advertisement did contain a disclaimer in terms of terms and restrictions applying to specific players, countries and even currencies.
What’s more, the advertisement did not state that all William Hill customers would be eligible to receive two extra bet boosts on each and every day for the duration of the World Cup.
This, in addition to the fact that specific circumstances related to the bettor not having been able to take advantage of the promotion, drew the case to a close. The ASA ultimately ruled that after careful consideration, it did not consider the advertisement to be misleading in any way.