Background
This Ruling forms part of a wider piece of work on PPI tax rebate advertising. See also a related ruling published on 31 January 2024.
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
Three paid-for Facebook ads for Your PPI Tax Rebate, a PPI tax rebate company, seen in April 2023:
a. The first ad stated, “Thousands of Brits are receiving tax refunds from HMRC. Check now to see if you have a successful claim […] Customers have received payouts of over £11,000. Discover what you could be owed”.
The ad included an image of a Union Jack. Further text stated, “HMRC Refunds. Largest claim: £11,767.69. Help with cost of living; 60 second process; It’s free to check”.
b. The second ad featured the same initial text as ad (a) as well as an image of a Union Jack. Prominent text stated, “Struggling with the Cost of Living?” Further text in a grey box, with a green line running down the side, stated, “This HMRC rebate is still available to claim. Largest rebate: £11,767.69. Claim your rebate”. In the bottom right corner of the box was the text “UK Resident Service” next to an illustration of a house.
c. The third ad featured the same initial text as ad (a) and an image with overlaying text which stated, “Struggling With The Cost Of Living? This HMRC rebate is still available to claim. Largest rebate: £11,767.69. Claim your rebate”. At the foot of the image was “UK Resident Service” next to an illustration of a house.
Issue
The ASA challenged whether the ads:
1. misleadingly implied they were from HMRC or for an official government service; and
2. irresponsibly took advantage of peoples’ concerns about the cost of living crisis.
Response
Brooksdale Ltd t/a Your PPI Tax Rebate did not respond to the ASA’s enquiries.Assessment
The ASA was concerned by Your PPI Tax Rebate’s lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to provide a substantive response to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.
1. & 2. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must not claim that the marketer (or any other entity referred to), the marketing communication or the advertised product had been approved, endorsed or authorised by any public or other body if it had not.
We understood Your PPI Tax Rebate assisted consumers in claiming tax deducted from statutory interest paid alongside payment protection insurance (PPI) refunds. Your PPI Tax Rebate charged a fee for completing the relevant form and contacting HMRC about the tax rebate. There was no official or approved third-party body for issuing such tax rebates. The ads were seen in the context of widespread news coverage about the increasing cost of living. That coverage included a focus on high inflation, which had affected the affordability of goods and services for households and had left some people struggling financially.
All ads included the text “Struggling With The Cost of Living”. Additionally, ad (a) referred to “HMRC Refunds”, and ads (b) and (c) referred to “HMRC rebate” and “UK Resident Service". We considered the presentation of the ads, such as the font and graphics used, were similar to those used on UK government department websites, and Facebook accounts. We considered that presentation and text gave the impression the ads had come from, or been endorsed by, an official government body that could help consumers struggling with the increased cost of living. However, we understood the ads had not been endorsed or approved by any official body. We considered that risked exploiting some consumers’ concerns about their finances and contributed to the impression that the ads were from an official government source that could help with the increased cost of living.
Because the ads gave the impression they had been endorsed or approved by an official government body when they had not, and because they took advantage of peoples’ concerns about the cost of living crisis, we considered they were irresponsible and likely to mislead, and had therefore breached the Code.
The ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.3 (Social responsibility), 3.1 (Misleading advertising), and 3.50 (Endorsements and testimonials).
Action
The ads must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Brooksdale Ltd t/a Your PPI Tax Rebate to ensure that future ads did not give the impression they had been approved or endorsed by a government body if that was not the case. We also told them to ensure that future ads were prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and society. We referred the matter to CAP’s Compliance team.
