Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A paid-for online display ad and a landing page on the website topchicdeals.com, for Kelini Portable Heater, seen in September 2022:
a. The paid-for ad, seen on a newspaper website, included an image of a hand holding a heater and stated, “Brits Are Using New Heating Device to Combat Soaring Energy Bills. InstaHeat”.
b. The landing page had the headline, “How To Heat Your Home At The Push Of a Button”. Further text said, “According to the national weather agency, it will be particularly cold this winter – possibly one of the coldest winters in decades. Are you prepared? To make matters worse … the energy crisis will result in expensive energy for the next three years. It’s not surprising this winter energy bills for an average household could hit £3,000. In these difficult times, people need a cheaper way to stay warm” and “This new type of ceramic heater has an incredible efficiency. Almost no energy is wasted. This is not only good for the environment, but also good for your wallet. It heats every area in your room in just 60 seconds. No other comparable heating device is as efficient. In addition, the Keilini Portable Heater is really cheap, tiny and very handy … With winter just around the corner, the Keilini Portable Heater is the cheapest yet most convenient way to stay warm and cozy [sic]”.
Issue
1. The complainant, who understood the product could not save consumers money on heating bills, challenged whether the claims in ads (a) and (b) to provide economical heating were misleading and could be substantiated.
2. The ASA challenged whether the claims, “This new type of ceramic heater has an incredible efficiency. Almost no energy is wasted” and “It heats every area in your room in just 60 seconds” in ad (b) were misleading and could be substantiated.
Response
Keilini Technology lnternational Co Ltd did not respond to the ASA's enquiries.
Assessment
The ASA was concerned by Keilini Technology lnternational Co Ltd’s lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 1.7 1.7 Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code. (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and told them to do so in future.
1. Upheld
Ad (a) encouraged consumers to use the plug-in mini heater to “Combat Soaring Energy Bills”. Further to that ad (b) stated that the upcoming winter could be one of the coldest in decades and that energy would be expensive for the next three years and they claimed their product was, “good for your wallet” and “the cheapest yet most convenient way to stay warm and cozy [sic]”. The ASA considered that consumers would therefore interpret the ads as promoting a product that provided a viable alternative to all heating systems, including gas central heating and that, due to the cost of energy prices and a difficult winter ahead, provided heating more economically (“cheapest”). We also considered that the ads presented the heater as providing an economical source of heating which could effectively heat a typical room or home.
We sought a view from the Energy Saving Trust. They stated that if someone wanted to heat a whole house then gas central heating, compared to single electric heaters, were preferable because gas was currently cheaper than electricity and because central heating radiators were able to heat rooms just as effectively by creating natural convection currents. They said that was especially the case with central heating with a full set of heating controls.
With regards to heating single rooms they said due to the relative price of electricity it would likely be cheaper to run one radiator from the gas central heating, than an electric heater continuously. They explained that even homes with electric heating, typically had electric storage heaters that could use the Economy7 tariff during off peak hours, which would be cheaper than the standard electricity tariff the advertiser’s product would run off. They also stated that a single small electric fan heater would be unlikely to be able to supply the amount of heat needed for a typical sized living room or kitchen. Multiple electric heaters would be required to provide comfort levels equivalent to a central heating system, in any home except a small single room apartment.
Ad (a) made no distinction between heating single rooms or a whole house and made an indirect comparison with all heating systems. Ad (b) discussed heating any room in the house regardless of size, highlighted the increased price of energy and stated their product was an alternative to all heating systems for the difficult upcoming winter.
Keilini Technology lnternational Co Ltd had produced no evidence that their product could supply the equivalent heating capabilities of other heating systems, either in a single room or in a whole house, at a cheaper price and therefore save consumers money. They had also provided no evidence that the heater provided an economical (“cheap”) form of heating which could effectively heat a typical room or home. We understood that it was highly unlikely that a small (in this case plug-in) electric heater would be a viable source of sufficient heating for most households. We therefore concluded that the claims had not been substantiated and that the ads were misleading.
On that point the ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading Advertising), 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation) and 3.11 3.11 Marketing communications must not mislead consumers by exaggerating the capability or performance of a product. (Exaggeration).
2. Upheld
The CAP Code stated, before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation.
Keilini Technology lnternational Co Ltd had produced no evidence to support the claims, “This new type of ceramic heater has an incredible efficiency. Almost no energy is wasted” and “It heats every area in your room in just 60 seconds”. We therefore concluded that the claims had not been substantiated and were likely to mislead.
On that point the ads breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading Advertising) and 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation).
Action
The ads must not appear again in their current form. We told Keilini Technology lnternational Co Ltd not to state or imply that their mini heater provided a viable alternative to other heating systems, including central heating or that it provided economical or cheap heating, including by not repeating the claims “good for your wallet” and “the Keilini Portable Heater is the cheapest yet most convenient way to stay warm” or similar claims in future. In addition, we told them to ensure that adequate evidence was held to support all objective claims, and not to repeat the claims, “an incredible efficiency. Almost no energy is wasted” and “It heats every area in your room in just 60 seconds”. We referred the matter to the CAP compliance team.
