ASA Adjudication on Green Sun Ltd
Green Sun Ltd
Unit 13 Armstrong Mall
Southwood Business Park
Farnborough
Hampshire
GU14 0NR
Date:
22 February 2012
Media:
National press
Sector:
Utilities
Number of complaints:
1
Agency:
Attinger Jack Advertising Ltd
Complaint Ref:
A11-177127
Ad
A press ad, for a utilities company, viewed in November 2011, was headed "Due to new government legislation announced 31-10-11 ACT NOW and get paid for generating your own electricity - it's easy!". Text stated "BEAT SPIRALLING ENERGY PRICES, SAVE UP TO 50% ON YOUR ENERGY BILLS ... EARN UP TO £36,000 TAX FREE* ... 10% EXTRA DISCOUNT FOR ALL ORDERS PLACED BEFORE 12/12/11 AND INSTALLED BY 31/3/12*** ... PLUS FREE INSTALLATION when you purchase any system above 2.0 kw ... THE BEST INVESTMENT FOR YOUR HOME THAT YOU'LL EVER MAKE ... Since the change to the feed-in tariff announced on 31/10/11 this is a great time to invest in solar power for your future energy needs. With electricity costs rising and returns on your savings declining, a Green Sun Solar PV System will not only save you money it offers the opportunity to enjoy an excellent return on your investment too". A table headed "The benefits of a Green Sun Solar P.V System" included the text "FREE electricity**. Deposit guarantee scheme. Earn up to £36,000 tax-free from the F.I.T and export tariff scheme*. Reduce your CO2 emissions. 25 year performance guarantee. Beat spiralling electricity prices. Usually installed in just one day†. Systems to suit every budget". The smallprint stated "*Based on 4 Kw system installed in Plymouth receiving the FIT and Export Tariff for 25 years and an average RPI of 4% p.a. **Free Electricity is based on you purchasing and installing a Solar PV System which will generate electricity free of charge ***Not in conjunction with any other offer †Based on a straightforward fitting."
Issue
The complainant challenged whether:
1. the claim "Due to new government legislation" was misleading, because that referred to a proposed Feed-in Tariff that was still in consultation at the time of publication;
2. the ad misleadingly implied that the new proposals would improve the Feed-in Tariff;
3. the earnings and savings figures were misleading and could be substantiated, because they were based on the current tariff, not the proposed new tariff; and
4. the offer of a 10% discount for orders placed by 12 December 2011 for systems installed by 31 March 2012 was misleading, because it omitted the fact that systems installed and registered on or after 12 December would qualify for the new, lower tariff.
CAP Code (Edition 12)
Response
Green Sun Ltd (Green Sun) stated the ad ran for a short period of time, was no longer being used and would not appear in the press again.
1. Green Sun accepted they were referring to a statement made by the Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change on 31 October 2011. The statement announced the results of the comprehensive review of the Solar PV consultation paper and they stated that would become legislation. They said they should have referred to the minister's announcement and not used the word "legislation".
2. Green Sun said they did not agree that the ad was in any way misleading because there was uncertainty concerning the future level of the feed-in tariff rate. They explained that from 1 April 2012 the government were proposing to strengthen the link between the feed in tariffs and the energy efficiency of a property by setting a minimum efficiency requirement which, if not met, would reduce the feed-in tariff rate to 9p per kWh. Because of that, they believed it was clearly evident that it was a great time to invest in solar power.
3. Green Sun provided the ASA with some workings regarding the earnings claims made in the ad, based on the new tariff.
4. Green Sun disagreed that the offer was misleading in any way. They stated they made no implication whatsoever that a customer would receive the old higher tariff.
Assessment
1. Upheld
The ASA understood from the information provided by the complainant and advertiser that a statement was made regarding a consultation paper on 31 October 2011 and not an announcement concerning new government legislation. On that basis, we concluded that the claim was misleading.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation) and 3.11 (Exaggeration).
2. Upheld
We considered that consumers would understand the claim "Since the change to the feed in tariff announced on 31/10/11 this is a great time to invest in solar power for your future energy needs" to suggest that, as a result of the announcement on 31 October 2011, the feed in tariff had been improved. We understood from the information provided by the complainant that the ministerial statement that the ad referred to announced that the feed in tariff would be reduced from 43.3p per kWh to 21p per kWh. On that basis and, because we had seen no evidence that demonstrated the feed-in tariff would improve as a result of that announcement, we concluded that the claim was misleading.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.11 (Exaggeration).
3. Upheld
Green Sun provided us with a table of figures to demonstrate the earnings claims made. They stated that the savings claim would no longer be used in their advertising and had mistakenly been included in the ad by their advertising agency. We noted Green Sun had said the earnings claims were based on the new tariff, however we noted that the earnings figures were based on a 4 kW system operating in optimal conditions. We considered that consumers were likely to interpret the ad to mean that the average householder could achieve the earnings figure stated. Because we had not seen robust evidence to demonstrate that the earnings figure stated was achievable for the average consumer, or any evidence to substantiate the savings quoted, we concluded that the claims were misleading.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.9 (Qualification) and 3.11 (Exaggeration).
4. Upheld
We noted that Green Sun stated they made no implication whatsoever that a customer would receive the old higher tariff. However, without qualification explaining that systems installed during that period would qualify for the new, lower tariff, we considered that consumers would infer from the ad that they would save money by ordering within that period, whereas that was not the case. We therefore concluded that the offer was misleading.
On this point the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.11 (Exaggeration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Green Sun not to make claims regarding future legislation concerning the Feed-in Tariff or to imply that the tariff had been improved unless they held robust evidence to support those claims. We also told Green Sun to ensure that earnings figures in future ads must be achievable for the average consumer.
