ASA Adjudication on Inspop.com Ltd

Ad

A TV ad for an insurance comparison site featured two men talking in a cartoon pub. The first man said "Every car insurance company says they're cheap", to which the barman added "And life's too short to spend all day comparing bloomin' quotes". The second man then said "Confused.com search brokers and big names, they'll find the best deal for you in seconds". The first man said "Confused.com" in a wistful voice. The barman then asked "But they're just estimates aren't they?" and the second man replied "Actually no, Confused.com ask enough questions to give accurate prices, and you could get prices not available anywhere else". A voice-over stated "Last year eight million people used Confused.com to search for car insurance". The second man then said "You could save money with Confused.com".

Issue

A viewer, who had used the advertised service, challenged whether the ad misleadingly implied that the quotes provided would be exact prices, because he had been unable to obtain car insurance at the prices quoted by the advertiser.

BCAP TV Code

Response

Confused.com said the insurance prices they offered customers were real quotes and not estimates, because they asked enough questions in their quote engine in order to be able to do that.

Confused.com pointed out that the complainant had referred to particular quotes that he was offered provided by the RAC and the Post Office. They explained that, at the time the complainant used the service, they were trialling the offer of a discounted rate to RAC members in addition to the existing RAC price applicable to non-members, which meant that two prices were returned. They explained that text underneath the RAC member price indicated that that price was available to current RAC members only, and could only be purchased via telephone completion. They said that meant that the customer could not click through to the RAC website from the discounted current member price. Confused.com said they were no longer marketing the RAC offer, but they were aware that it continued to be available on other insurance comparison sites.

Confused.com said, at the time the complainant used their service, the Post Office were offering £50 cash back to anyone who purchased a car insurance policy from them. They explained that the price displayed on their site included the £50 discount and that that was explained in text underneath the price, which stated "Price includes £50 cash back, which will be reimbursed after purchase of policy". Confused.com said when the customer clicked through to the Post Office site the price would appear to be £50 higher, but that customers would receive £50 back after purchasing the premium.

Clearcast said they had requested an assurance from Confused.com, before approving the ad, that they could indeed offer real quotes. They said that Confused.com had assured them they could offer real quotes because they used a series of detailed questions to obtain more accurate results than an estimated quote. Clearcast said that, given the response from Confused.com, they were still satisfied that the ad was not misleading.

Assessment

Not upheld

The ASA noted the response of Confused.com and Clearcast. We also noted that the RAC prices for members and non-members were displayed underneath each other. Although we acknowledged that that might be confusing for some customers, we considered that explanatory text underneath the member-only offer made it clear that that price was limited to current RAC members. We also noted Confused.com's explanation that the cheaper Post Office quote displayed on their website, compared to the Post Office's own website, was because the quote included the £50 cash back. We considered that text underneath the quote made it sufficiently clear that the price included a £50 discount, which would be reimbursed after the customer had purchased the policy. We considered that Confused.com had made clear any limitations or conditions that applied to displayed quote results, and were satisfied that the prices offered by Confused.com were exact quotes and not estimates. We therefore concluded that the ad was not misleading.

We investigated the ad under CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading advertising), 5.2.1 (Evidence) and 5.2.2 (Implications) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action necessary.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Broadcast)