Customer's beef over burger meal with no socks on the side!

12 July 2018 - 12:21 By Nico Gous
The ASA accepted McDonald’s explanation that it had been an isolated incident.
The ASA accepted McDonald’s explanation that it had been an isolated incident.
Image: Gallo Images/Foto24

Jeannette Oosterhuis placed her burger meal order expecting to get a complimentary pair of socks on the side.

But when a voucher was delivered instead‚ she saw red!

Oosterhuis lodged a complaint against McDonald’s after failing to receive a promised “limited edition surprise gift” during a one-day promotion on June 7.

She reported the fast food chain to the Advertising Standards Authority of South Africa (ASA)‚ saying their Extra Large Grand Big Mac meal promotion on Facebook was “misleading to consumers”.

McDonald’s advertised the deal in a post that stated: “Looks like we’re getting closer to the launch of #BigMacYourWay with delivery! Order an Extra Large Grand Big Mac meal for a limited edition surprise gift! Hurry‚ it’s only valid between 10.30am and 12.30pm‚ while stocks last.”

Oosterhuis argued the visuals – which depicted images including a pair of red socks - gave the impression that the gift may be a pair of socks. Instead‚ she got a voucher.

McDonald’s explained that it had been a one-day promotion. Customers who ordered the meal and elected to have it delivered by McDelivery or Uber Eats would receive a complimentary gift of either a pin badge‚ a pair of socks or a keyring.

They investigated what had transpired and discovered that the order by Oosterhuis was incorrectly processed by a cashier‚ who entered the wrong promotional code at the till.

McDonald’s added that according to their terms and conditions‚ a gift could be substituted “with an appropriate replacement of equal or greater value”.

The ASA accepted McDonald’s explanation that it had been an isolated incident.

“In addition‚ and in an effort to compensate (Oosterhuis) for her inconvenience‚ it (McDonald’s) also tendered to deliver to her a pair of the promotional socks.

“From this‚ it would appear that the advertising was not misleading and did not create ambiguity in terms of the promotional gift‚ as the advertised gifts were available‚” ruled the ASA.


READ MORE: 

X