ASA Adjudication on Renault UK Ltd

Ad

A national press ad, for electric vehicles, described Renault’s plan to put four such models on the road by the end of 2012. The ad claimed “… the well-to-wheel efficiency of a Renault Fluence Z.E. will help reduce CO2 emissions by at least 90% compared to a current Diesel model* ...” Small print stated “… *Comparison between a Renault Fluence Z.E. (basis: French average electric mix) and a model from an identical category: Renault Megane Hatch 1.5 dCi (85HP) emitting 133g CO2 well-to wheel.”

Issue

The complainant objected that the ad was misleading, because the 90% figure was based on the French electricity generation mix, which had significantly lower levels of CO2 emissions than electricity produced in the UK.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

Renault UK Ltd (Renault) said the ad was part of a European-wide campaign, which used the reference to the French average electricity generation mix. Renault said the Z.E. models would be available on the UK market from 2011 onwards and maintained that the ad attempted merely to draw comparisons between internal combustion engines and their effects versus electric vehicles. They believed that, given that the weight of Renault electric vehicle sales in France was likely to outweigh UK sales significantly, it was not misleading to make reference to the source of electricity being the French average mix. They pointed out, however, that they qualified the claim in the footnote and believed that anyone reading the ad as a whole would not be misled in any way. Renault nevertheless added that there were a number of electricity providers in the UK who provided carbon free or reduced carbon tariffs, allowing UK consumers to buy electricity in the UK with CO2 emissions similar to the French average mix.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA noted the differences between the French and UK average electricity generation mixes. We understood that the French figure was based on a significant proportion of nuclear generation, which resulted in significantly lower levels of CO2 emissions per unit of electricity when compared with the UK. We noted Renault had qualified the claim, explaining that the savings figure was based on circumstances in France. However, we considered that readers were unlikely to understand the difference between electricity generating mixes in France and the UK and how that would affect CO2 savings in different countries. Consequently, we considered that they were likely to expect that the figure quoted in the body copy was representative of the typical savings possible in the UK. Although we noted Renault maintained that certain energy providers in the UK could provide low or zero carbon electricity, we noted the claim was qualified with "at least" and considered that readers would further infer that that figure represented the lower end of the range of typical CO2 savings possible for drivers of the Renault Z.E. models in the UK.

Because the figure was not representative of CO2 savings typically available in the UK, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.

The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)