Ad description
Two radio ads for ULEZProsperity heard on LBC in October 2024:
(a) The first ad said, “City driving can give you financial returns with ULEZProsperity. Imagine owning a car that earns like a house. You buy it, we rent it back, and you reap the rewards. Become a car lord today and drive returns for 37 months, with a guaranteed sale price at the end. Interested? To start your journey and for terms and conditions, visit ulezprosperity.com. Ulezprosperity.com. Drive prosperity forward”.
(b) The second ad said, “Own a car that earns a return! You buy it, we rent it back, and you reap the rewards. Get info and conditions at ulezprosperity.com”.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the ads breached the Code because they implied that buying a car, which was an unregulated product, had investment potential and therefore they should not have been broadcast on a non-specialist radio station.
Response
Rosenthal Capital Ltd t/a ULEZProsperity said their product was a commercial arrangement rather than a financial or regulated investment product and that the ads did not present the arrangement as an investment.
They said the ads described fixed, predictable financial returns derived from a rental agreement and a guaranteed buyback price. They explained that the customer rented a vehicle to ULEZProsperity for a fixed monthly return under a defined contract term of 37 months. Their product differed from an investment product because customers retained full legal ownership, which was evidenced by the vehicle’s registration document, invoices and contracts that were issued in the customer’s name.
They also said that the arrangement mirrored other commercial agreements where assets, such as property or vehicles, were leased or rented to generate income for the owner. ULEZProsperity allowed car owners to derive a fixed rental income, and they ensured their ads were clear, factual and compliant with the BCAP Code. The ads featured the phrases: “financial returns”, which referred to the fixed rental income, not speculative gains; “drive returns for 37 months”, which described the structured rental period with defined payments, not an uncertain financial venture; and “reap the rewards”, which emphasised the benefits of participation in the programme and was consistent with marketing language for rental arrangements.
The product was not speculative or an investment regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). In addition, the terms of ownership and the commercial nature of the arrangement were clear in the ads, and the benefits were not exaggerated. They explained that the ads invited listeners to visit the ULEZProsperity website for full terms and conditions or to speak directly to a consultant to get full insight into the programme. The website also included explanatory text that clarified the structured nature of returns, ensuring transparency and accessibility of material information, which they believed satisfied the requirement for qualifications to be presented clearly or made available.
Radiocentre said they endorsed the advertiser’s points and, at the time of clearance, did not regard the ads as implying to listeners that it was an investment, but rather a financial benefit from rental.
Assessment
Upheld
The BCAP Code stated that certain categories of advertisements may be broadcast on specialised financial channels, stations or programming only, such as those for investments not regulated or permitted under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA). An advertisement that implied, for example, that a collectors’ item or other unregulated product or service could have investment potential (in the colloquial sense) would normally be unacceptable.
The ASA acknowledged ULEZProsperity’s comment that the product was a commercial arrangement rather than a financial or regulated investment product. However, we considered the focus of the ads was on promoting a buy-to-let arrangement for cars which we considered was likely to be understood by consumers as a type of investment. Ad (a) referred to “financial returns”, “reap the rewards” and “drive returns for 37 months”, and ad (b) referred to “Own a car that earns a return”. We further noted that the car purchased would exclusively be let out and generally then sold at the end of the agreement and therefore was only purchased to generate returns for the user. We considered the claims in the ads and the way the product was presented gave the impression that it was an investment opportunity which would provide financial returns.
We also acknowledged ULEZProsperity’s further comment that the ads invited listeners to visit the ULEZProsperity website for full terms and conditions. The website included text that stated, “EXAMPLE RETURNS WITH CAPITAL DEPLOYED” and return claims that stated a range of yields from 22.12% to 23.72% based on assets ranging from £20,000 to £30,000. The website also included small text at the bottom of the page that said, “Participating in our program carries inherent risks… While capital is 100% guaranteed, returns are projected. Past performance does not guarantee future results”. We understood from the website that ULEZProsperity offered an investment service, as suggested in ads (a) and (b).
We considered that the ads implied that a buy-to-let arrangement for cars, which we understood was not regulated under FSMA, had investment potential. The ads should therefore have been broadcast only on a specialised financial radio channel and because that was not the case, we concluded that the ads breached the Code.
Ads (a) and (b) breached BCAP Code rules 14.5 and 14.5.4 (Financial products, services and investments).
Action
The ads must not be broadcast again in the form complained of on non-specialist stations. We told Rosenthal Capital Ltd t/a ULEZProsperity to ensure that future ads which implied that buying and letting cars, which was an unregulated financial product, had investment potential were broadcast only on specialised financial stations.
