Dental Tribune United Kindom Edition

Published by Dental Tribune UK Ltd © 2011, Dental Tribune UK Ltd. All rights reserved. Dental Tribune UK Ltd makes every effort to report clinical information and manufacturer’s product news accurately, but cannot assume responsibility for the validity of product claims, or for typographical errors. The publishers also do not assume responsibility for product names or claims, or statements made by advertisers. Opinions expressed by authors are their own and may not reflect those of Dental Tribune International. Group Editor Lisa Townshend Tel: 020 7400 8979 Lisa@dentaltrib- uneuk.com Editorial Assistant Laura Hatton Laura..hatton@dentalt- ribuneuk.com Tel: 020 7400 8981 Advertising Director Joe Aspis Tel: 020 7400 8969 Joe@dentaltribuneuk. com Sales Executive Joe Ackah Tel: 020 7400 8964 Joe.ackah@dentalt- ribuneuk.com Design & Production Ellen Sawle Ellen@dentaltrib uneuk.com Tel: 020 7400 8921 Clinical Editor Livui Steier Dental Tribune UK Ltd 4th Floor, Treasure House, 19–21 Hatton Garden, London, EC1N 8BA Whiter teeth in 1 minute. T he Advertising Standards Agency (ASA) has upheld a series of complaints over an offer of dental treatment being ‘misleading’. The offer, supplied by dis- count company Groupon, gave potential patients discounted In- visalign treatment at a Harley St dental clinic. The ASA received complaints that the offer was misleading in its wording, as the deal stated “£98 for £1650 to- wards Invisalign Teeth-Bracing Technology and Whitening. View now For £98,00 [sic] Discount 94 per cent Saving £1552,00 [sic]”. Underneath, below the heading “Highlights” text stated “£1650 discount on the full price (usu- ally £3,500)” and text under the heading “Fine Print” stated “Holder must pay remaining balance”. The complainant chal- lenged the wording, stating that once she had clicked through to the offer, she found there was a significant amount to pay in ad- dition to the £98. Despite Groupon’s claim that it believed that an average con- sumer would not be misled by the e-mail, because the signifi- cant conditions regarding price were included, the ASA upheld the complaint, stating it consid- ered that it was not clear that a customer was simply buying a discount, albeit for more than they were paying, or that they would need to pay a significant additional amount in order to re- ceive the advertised treatment. We therefore concluded that, because the wording and nature of the offer was confusing and not made clearly to consumers, the e- mail was misleading. Groupon was told that the email offer must not appear again in its current form, and that the company needed to ensure the nature of their offers are clearly made in future e-mails and that the advertised price is correct. DT Groupon offer ‘misled patients’ F or the first time in its his- tory, the General Den- tal Council (GDC), an- nounced that is has more than 100,000 dental professionals on its registers. As of 4 July 2011 the figure stood at 100,001. Compulsory registration was introduced for dental nurs- es in 2008 and they now make up the biggest registrant group with more than 46,000 on the register. The breakdown for registrant types is as follows: • Dentist 38252 • Clinical Dental Technician 170 • Dental Hygienist 5900 • Dental Nurse 46793 • Dental Techniciana 7011 • Dental Therapist 1709 • Orthodontic Therapist 166 TOTAL 100001 DT 100,000 and counting July 18-24, 20112 News United Kingdom Edition