ASA upholds complaint against North West cosmetic training company

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled in favour of a complaint lodged against a cosmetic training company based in the North West of England. The complaint, brought forth by the Joint Council for Cosmetic Practitioners (JCCP), highlighted misleading advertising practices.

The contested advertisement, posted on Facebook by the training company, promoted a course titled "Pathway to Aesthetics" as 'fully accredited' for £299. The ASA determined that the advertisement was likely to mislead prospective students and violated the Committees of Advertising Practice Code.

The JCCP argued that the promotional post was deceptive, as it failed to adequately communicate the nature, requirements, and qualifications associated with the aesthetics procedures training course. The claim of being 'fully accredited' and ensuring students were 'fully qualified' was also found to be misleading by the ASA.

In its ruling, the ASA cited the NHS's recommendation to avoid practitioners with only short training courses due to potential complications and risks. It also emphasised the importance of checking professionals' accreditation on a voluntary register endorsed by the Professional Standards Authority, including the Joint Council of Cosmetic Practitioners.

The ASA acknowledged the distinction between Continuing Professional Development (CPD) training and recognised qualifications, noting that the advertised course only provided a CPD certificate, not a recognised qualification. The finding stated that the advertisement's promise of students becoming 'fully qualified' was misleading, as it was an introductory course, requiring additional training and experience for independent practice.

As a result of the upheld complaint, the aesthetics training company has been cautioned against implying that its courses confer recognised qualifications.

“Cases like this underline the urgent need for better regulation in the non-surgical cosmetic treatments sector," says Professor David Sines, chair of the JCCP. "The government has just concluded a national consultation on the introduction of a new licensing scheme that will ensure people who administer cosmetic procedures are properly experienced, trained and qualified, have the necessary insurance cover and operate from premises that are clean, hygienic and suitably licensed.”

“This ASA ruling represents an explicit distinction between fully endorsed aesthetics qualifications and short CPD courses. The new proposed licensing scheme cannot be implemented quickly enough if we are to improve consumer safety and reduce the risk of injury and harm arising from inadequate training and ‘botched’ cosmetic treatments.”

Dawn Knight, a JCCP trustee overseeing complaints, revealed a surge in complaints against aesthetic training providers, including false claims about qualifications meeting proposed licensing scheme standards. 

“Over the past six months the JCCP has received almost 50 complaints about aesthetic training providers," says Knight. "We have seen an increase in false claims that advertised training qualifications will offer a satisfactory response to the new, proposed licensing scheme and some advertisers openly encouraging students to take advantage of the current lack of regulation.  

“We have also received complaints about poor hygiene in training premises and concerns over the use of unlicenced – and in some cases counterfeit – products being used. It is essential that we crack down on misleading advertising and encourage consumers to use cosmetic practitioners who are on our official register which is accredited by the Professional Standards Authority.”

For the complete ASA finding on this case, interested parties can refer to this link.