ASA Adjudication on Foc Energy

Ad

A leaflet, for solar panels, was headlined “Energy Bills Go Up AGAIN By 25%” and made a number of claims about solar energy.

Issue

The complainant challenged whether:

1. Foc Energy could substantiate the claim that recipients could "Save £750+ a year On Your Current And Future Energy Bills";

2. the claim "FREE Central Heating" was misleading, because he understood solar panels only provided partial heating of domestic hot water and the customer would have to pay to have the work undertaken;

3. Foc Energy could substantiate the implication that solar panels provided a return on investment, because he believed that they required replacement after around 10 years, and

4. the ad could cause undue fear or distress.

The ASA challenged whether Foc Energy could substantiate the claims:

5. "Add 10% (overnight) onto your properties [sic] value", and

6. "Do your bit and save over a million tonnes of CO2 emissions per year".

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Foc Energy said for a consumer using both their photovoltaic and thermo store products the £750 saving figure would be a minimum. They pointed out that energy companies paid 41p/watt of energy produced yielding £320 per year from a 1 Kw array. They added that the Thermo Store product also provided both central heating and hot water with the tubes performing equally well in sunshine and daylight.

2. Foc Energy said they did not sell solar panels only the tubes, which, they maintained, could provide homes with all of their central heating needs for eight months of the year.

3. Foc Energy said their panels cost, on average, £3000 but allowed a return on investment that could offset that amount in less than five years.

4. Foc Energy said energy increases were not their responsibility and the leaflet merely pointed out the facts of energy price increases.

5. Foc Energy maintained that the figure was an established average held within housing institutes.

6. Foc Energy maintained that having solar energy on a national level saved over a million tonnes of CO2 per year.

Assessment

1. and 3. Upheld

The ASA noted Foc Energy had not provided evidence to support the claims. We noted their comments and acknowledged that it was possible that some solar panels could provide a return on investment over a substantial period of time. However, we considered that the potential for savings from Foc Energy's solar energy products would have to be supported by data demonstrating their performance when in actual use. Because we had not seen evidence to support the claims, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.

On points 1 and 3, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

2. Upheld

We considered that recipients were likely to expect that the solar panel products could provide for all their central heating needs. We noted Foc Energy had not provided evidence to support the claim and considered that their comment that the product could provide central heating for eight months of the year directly contradicted the likely understanding of the claim. We also noted the solar panels had significant installation costs, which were incurred by homeowners, and considered that these costs further contradicted the claim that central heating would be free. We concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

4. Not upheld

We noted the ad featured several claims based on recent trends in energy prices. We considered that recipients were unlikely to be unduly distressed by the references to increasing energy prices because such information was commonly available in the media. We therefore concluded that the ad was unlikely to cause undue fear or distress.

On this point, we investigated the ad under CAP Code clause 9.1 (Fear and distress) but did not find it in breach.

5. Upheld

We noted Foc Energy had not provided evidence to support the claim. We considered that we would require robust, independent evidence to demonstrate the positive effect of the solar panels on property prices. Because we had not seen this, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

6. Upheld

We noted Foc Energys argument that the claim related to national figures for CO2 emissions offset. However, we considered that the claim was likely to lead recipients to infer that they themselves could offset the emission of significant amounts of CO2 by purchasing the advertised solar power system. Because we had seen no evidence to show that that was the case, we concluded that the ad was likely to mislead.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

Action

The ad must not appear again in its current form. We advised Foc Energy to consult the CAP Copy Advice team for guidance on the acceptability of future, similar claims.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)