ASA Adjudication on British Gas Trading Ltd

Ad

An ad, for British Gas Price Protection, featured two talking flames in a fireplace. Onscreen text stated “Based on a true customer story. Voices of actors.” The flames then had a conversation. The first flame said “We got Price Protection with British Gas a while ago now… it made sense to sign up…” The second flame added “so we didn’t have to worry about our prices going up…” Onscreen text stated “Subject to regulatory or VAT changes, certain home moves or cancellation. Any savings may vary and are dependent on standard price rises.” The first flame then said “well it turns out we made a great decision…” The second flame added “and, we expect to save around £180 this year.” Onscreen text stated “Customer savings based on Price Protection 2010 rates versus British Gas standard rates.” A voiceover stated “Over a million customers have already benefited from our price protection deals. Every sixty seconds someone switches back to British Gas.” The onscreen text then stated “For our latest Price Protection deals, visit house.co.uk British Gas. Doing the right thing.”

Issue

Npower objected that the ad was misleading because:

1. it referred to the Price Protection 2010 product, which was no longer available; and

2. it did not state that viewers had to pay a premium on British Gas standard rates when signing up to Price Protection products

BCAP TV Code

Response

The Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre (BACC) believed the story being told in the ad was highly transparent. They said the ad was not for a specific Price Protection (PP) product, but focused on the broader PP concept. The BACC said the ad invited viewers to visit the British Gas website to learn more about the concept of PP and the latest available deals. They said the saving quoted as an example of the PP concept was both meaningful and attainable because it was based on the average saving for the PP 2010 product. The BACC maintained that the onscreen text made clear to viewers that the product referred to was a previous plan, which was used for illustrative purposes. They said the complainants point relating to premiums was misconceived as the ad did not sell a present or future plan, but merely encouraged viewers to find out more on the British Gas website, where full details of current products appeared. The BACC also pointed out that the complaint was from a competitor and that, as far as they were aware, no customers had complained.

British Gas Trading Ltd (British Gas) said the ad was intended to illustrate the savings that customers had enjoyed when they signed up to their PP products. They said the product discussed in the testimonial was PP 2010, which, they acknowledged, was no longer available to new customers although a similar product, PP 2009, was still available. British Gas pointed out that, due to the nature of Price Protection products, customers experienced savings when suppliers standard rates were increased and maintained that the only way to give a practical demonstration of the benefits of PP was to use the most recent price increase. They pointed out that the last time they had a price increase the product available was PP 2010. British Gas maintained that viewers were unlikely to believe that PP 2010 was a current product because the testimonial made clear that the flames took out PP "a while ago…." They also pointed out that the on-screen text provided further clarification to viewers as it directed them to the British Gas website for details of the "latest" PP product. British Gas also maintained that the intention of the ad was not to communicate details of their latest PP products. They said details of the premium were clearly listed on their website in the information provided to consumers before signing up to PP.

Assessment

1. Complaint not upheld

The ASA noted PP 2010 was no longer available. We noted, however, the testimonial referred non-specifically to PP and that those references were in the past tense. We considered that viewers were likely to understand the ad as a promotion of the idea of freezing energy prices in order to enjoy savings and noted the current PP product, PP 2009, was based on that concept. Although we noted the reference to PP 2010 in the onscreen text, we also noted the onscreen text subsequently encouraged viewers to visit the British Gas website for details of the "latest deals", which we considered implied the ad was not for a specific product.  We also considered that the PP 2010 reference was not given sufficient prominence to lead viewers to infer that that was the product advertised, but considered it reasonable and transparent for British Gas to include it so viewers were aware of the basis of their savings claim. We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead.

On this point, we investigated the ad under the CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading advertising) and 5.2.3 (Qualifications) but did not find it in breach.

2. Complaint not upheld

We noted the current British Gas PP product featured a premium on the standard rate for gas paid by dual fuel customers. We considered, however, that the ad did not need to refer to the premium because it focused on the general benefits of the PP concept in providing customers with savings and did not refer to the price levels associated with PP or seek to compare them with other suppliers rates.  We concluded that the ad was unlikely to mislead.

On this point, we investigated the ad under the CAP (Broadcast) TV Advertising Standards Code rules 5.1 (Misleading advertising) and 5.2.3 (Qualifications) but did not find it in breach.

Action

No further action required.