Eagle Fleet Services Private Limited - Red Taxi

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: Consumer Organization

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the claims in the advertisement, or alternately to substantiate the claims with supporting data. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they availed and submitted their response. The advertiser in their response stated that the referenced content dates back to 2024, making it outdated and not reflective of their current services, or business model. The post was not a paid advertisement but merely an old social media post, and no active campaigns are associated with it. Upon further review, the advertiser also stated that the account in question is unauthorized and not owned or managed by them, identifying it as a fake profile impersonating their brand. As they have no control over this account, they cannot remove the content but have reported the issue to Meta for appropriate action. The advertiser provided a screenshot of the support case/report submitted to Meta (Facebook) as evidence. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the Facebook advertisement (https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=122188966652164000&id=61554920006711&rdid=wjZzpA GbDeYJUI1i#), considered the complaint, and the advertiser’s response. The CCC took note of the advertiser’s clarification that the content in question was part of their old post and not part of any active promotion. The CCC discussed that the claims in the advertisement were presented as financial benefits but did not provide essential details. The commission claim did not clarify whether it applied to gross or net fare, or whether other deductions such as platform fees, service charges, or taxes would still be charged. The gold reward claim did not explain the timeframe for completing 100 bookings, whether there were any performance requirements or other conditions to actually receive the reward. Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the claims, “6 months 0% commission”, and “After completing 100 bookings, receive 0.5 gram gold”, are misleading and are likely to lead to widespread disappointment among cab/taxi drivers. The said claims contravened Chapter I, Clauses 1.4 and 1.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC noted that the advertiser has taken appropriate action by reporting this matter to Meta as the post appeared on a fake account misusing their brand.