Background
This Ruling forms part of a wider piece of work on home efficiency scheme grants, identified for investigation following intelligence gathered by the ASA. See also related rulings published on 11 December 2024.
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
Four paid-for Facebook ads for Citizens Energy Advice, published on 18 June 2024:
a. The first ad stated that, “[home emoji] Up to £70,000 free funding is now available [home emoji] Citizens Energy Advice is here to assist UK homeowners and private tenants in accessing free home efficiency grants! Say goodbye to hefty energy bills with our help. [tick emoji] Take advantage of up to £70,000 funding per household for […]”.
The ad also included an image that displayed the government logo above text, which stated, “HM Government” and the crown logo above text which stated “GOV.UK ECO4 Scheme”. Further text stated, “DOES SOMEONE IN YOUR HOME GET BENEFITS? Do you use Oil, LPG, Electricity or Solid Fuel to heat your home? GOV.UK”.
Text underneath stated, “Check Your Eligibility [tick emoji] We help homeowners, private tenants & landlords to access home efficiency grants including funding […]” and a button labelled “Apply now”.
b. The second ad included the same text as in ad (a).
The ad also included an image that displayed the crown logo alongside text that stated, “GOV.UK”. Text then stated, “SAVE £1,000’S EVERY YEAR!”.
Text underneath the image was the same as in ad (a).
c. The third ad included the same text as in ad (a).
The ad also included an image that displayed the crown logo with text underneath that stated, “GOV.UK ECO4 Scheme”. Text then stated, “UP TO £70,000 FREE ECO FUNDING APPLY NOW AVAILABLE GRANTS SOLAR PANELS HEAP PUMPS STORAGE HEATERS INSULATIONS Funding provided by the Energy Company Obligation Scheme”.
Text underneath the image was the same as in ad (a).
d. The fourth ad included the same text as in ad (a).
The ad included an image that displayed the crown logo with text underneath that stated “GOV.UK ECO4 Scheme”. Text then stated “FREE ECO GRANTS FOR HOMES WITHOUT MAINS GAS” and bullet points which stated “FREE AIR SOURCE HEAT PUMPS FREE SOLAR PANELS FREE CAVITY WALL INSULATION FREE INTERNAL WALL INSULATION FREE LOFT INSULATION FREE STORAGE HEATERS” and a button labelled “APPLY NOW”. Further text stated “MUST HAVE” and included bullet points which stated “Pension Guarantee Credit Employment and Support Allowance Jobseeker’s Allowance Income Support Working & Child Tax Credits Universal Credit Child Benefit Housing Benefit Pension Credit Savings Credit”.
Text underneath the image was the same as in ad (a).
Issue
The ASA challenged whether the ads:
1. misleadingly implied that the advertiser was associated with or endorsed by the UK Government; and
2. falsely implied that the marketer was acting for purposes outside its business and did not make their commercial intent clear.
Response
1. ECO4U LTD t/a Citizens Energy Advice said that they did not intend for their ads to be misleading. Their services were not directly approved, endorsed or authorised by the UK Government. They provided consumers with information and support related to energy efficiency and eco-friendly initiatives, which were in line with government goals. They would review their ads to ensure that distinction was always clear.
2. They said that their business worked in partnership with certified installers to facilitate the installation of eco-friendly improvements. They helped homeowners understand and access energy efficiency grants and installations. They were not installers themselves and did not work exclusively for a single company. Instead they connected customers to a network of trusted installers to ensure that they received the best service.
They said that they had now removed all the ads that were the subject of this investigation.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA considered that the use of the UK Government logo, which featured the UK’s Coat of Arms, alongside “HM Government” in ad (a), and the use of a previous version of the crown logo used by GOV.UK, and “GOV.UK” in all of the ads, would be interpreted by consumers to mean that Citizens Energy Advice was associated with or endorsed by the UK Government. We further considered that the name, “Citizens Energy Advice”, which closely resembled Citizens Advice, an organisation which was part-funded by the government, added to that impression.
We understood that at the time the ads were seen there was a government-endorsed home energy efficiency scheme available, but that Citizens Energy Advice was not specifically associated with or endorsed by the government in any way.
Because the ads gave the impression that Citizens Energy Advice was associated with or endorsed by the UK Government, when that was not the case, we concluded that the ads were misleading.
On that point, ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation) and 3.50 (Endorsements and Testimonials).
2. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must not falsely claim or imply that the marketer was acting for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession and should make clear their commercial intent if that was not obvious from the context.
We considered that consumers would understand from the company trading name “Citizens Energy Advice” which, as referenced at point 1, closely resembled Citizens Advice, alongside the government associated logos and wording, that the ads were from a government-endorsed public entity, rather than a business. We considered that consumers would understand from the ads that Citizens Energy Advice would assess consumers’ eligibility to receive a home efficiency grant, and if eligible, consumers would be able to claim the grant through them. However, we understood that the purpose of the ads was to gain interest from customers and then pass on their contact details to the installers that they worked with.
Because they did not make clear that they were primarily a lead generating business that provided consumers’ contact details to installers, and instead implied that they were offering grants for energy upgrades, we concluded that they misleadingly implied that they were acting for purposes outside of their profession and breached the Code.
On that point, ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 2.3 (Recognition of marketing communications).
Action
The ads must not appear again in the form complained of. We told ECO4U LTD t/a Citizens Energy Advice to ensure that their future ads did not misleadingly imply that they were associated with or endorsed by the UK Government. We also told them to not to falsely imply they were acting for purposes outside their trade and to make clear the nature of their business.
