Home / News / Trouble for one of South Africa’s fastest-growing car brands

Trouble for one of South Africa’s fastest-growing car brands

Chinese carmaker Jetour has come under fire after the Advertising Regulatory Board (ARB) found three of its advertisements in South Africa mislead consumers.

The complaints against the fast-growing brand related to three separate advertisements – one TV commercial, an advert on its website, and a listing on the Cars.co.za sales platform.

The latter was the first to draw the attention of the ARB when, last month, a consumer complained about an advertisement for a white 2025 Jetour T2 2.0T Odyssey with 15km mileage for R679,900.

A complaint was lodged after the consumer tried to buy it and was informed that the vehicle did not exist in stock, and that the listing was instead being used to generate leads and secure deposits for a waiting list.

As a result, the ARB determined that advertising a specific vehicle with specified mileage on a third-party aggregator platform creates a reasonable expectation that the exact vehicle is available for immediate purchase.

It ruled that because the advert did not disclose that the vehicle was subject to order allocations and delivery delays, it was deemed misleading, and instructed the advertiser to remove or amend the listing.

Law firm Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr weighed in on the ruling, noting that the Advertising Regulatory Board will take a dim view of imaginary stock.

“Golden Era Motors, trading as Jetour Pretoria, put forward numerous submissions to the ARB to defend the advertisement and why a consumer could not have expected to immediately purchase the advertised vehicle,” it said.

Among the submissions were claims that “everyone does it” and that supply constraints of the vehicle were due to limitations of the allocation systems.

Other claims included that the advertisement constituted a “forward order” to assist with the allocation of the vehicles, and the allocation constraints were communicated to the consumer by a sales executive.

“Unmoved by the dealership’s submissions, the ARB agreed with the consumer and directed the dealership to withdraw the advertisement”, said Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr.

“The ARB reminded the dealership that an explanation is not a disclaimer, and consumers clicking the link ‘enquire now’ regarding a listing are not unreasonable in expecting the advertised car to exist.”

More misleading advertising

This month, the ARB received two more complaints regarding Jetour commercials, with the body ruling that both constituted misleading advertising.

The first complaint was lodged against Jetour for a television commercial for the Dashing, which was advertised “from R4,999 pm” but only displayed a brief “T’s and C’s apply”.

The complainant argued that the advertisement lacked crucial financial details, such as the required deposit, repayment period, and residual value.

In response, the ARB ruled that omitting these material factors in a vehicle lease or rental advertisement is misleading.

Additionally, the body instructed its members not to accept any Jetour advertisements that fail to expressly include or clearly present the payment terms and conditions.

Earlier this week, the ARB ruled in favour of another complainant, who argued the Jetour South Africa website advertised that the “X70 Plus Deluxe” model included two “Rubik’s Cube Key with Remote Engine Start”.

The consumer objected to the advertising because the vehicle’s key does not actually have remote start capabilities.

The ARB found the claim that it does is incorrect, and likely to mislead consumers, especially considering Jetour’s own brochure only mentions a “Remote Key” and “Keyless Start System”.

Again, ARB members were instructed to refuse any advertising that claims the specific vehicle features the key type and its capabilities.

Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr noted that the message from the Advertising Regulatory Board to advertisers is clear.

“If your advertisements are writing cheques that your forecourt can’t cash, expect consequences,” the firm noted.

“The Consumer Protection Act’s bait marketing provisions exist to stop suppliers from dangling attractive listings to generate foot traffic or accumulate orders they cannot fill.”

Show comments
Sign up to the TopAuto newsletter