Background
This Ruling forms part of a wider piece of work on misleadingness in ads for accident claims management companies. The ads were identified for investigation following intelligence gathered by our Active Ad Monitoring system, which uses AI to proactively search for online ads that might break the rules. See also related rulings published on 7 January and 29 April 2026.
Ad description
Three Google search listings and a website for UK Motor Claims, an accident claims management company, seen on 9 July 2025:
a. The first Google search result featured the URL
“www.ukmotorclaims.co.uk/report/accident”. Headline text stated, “Car Insurance Claim – Accident Claim Specialists”. Further text stated, “Call Now for Immediate Assistance. We’ll get you back on the road quickly & easily. No Excess to Pay. Like for Like Replacement Vehicle in 24 […].
b. Another Google search result featured text which stated, “Call [phone number] Non-fault Accident? Call Us Now. No Excess to Pay & Protect Your NCB Like for Like Replacement Vehicle in 24 hours. Guaranteed Repairs. 24/7 UK Call Centre”.
c. Another Google search result featured the URL “www.ukmotorclaims.co.uk/”. Headline text stated, “Report a Car Accident – Car Accident Claim Helpline”. Further text stated, “No Excess to Pay. Like for Like Replacement Vehicle in 24 hours. Guaranteed Repairs. Call Now for Immediate Accident Assistance. Get Back On the Road Quickly & Easily. Protect Your NCB”. Below were “Report a Claim” and “Make an Accident Claim” hyperlinked buttons.
d. The website www.ukmotorclaims.co.uk/, which was the landing page for the links in ads (a), (b) and (c), featured headline text which stated, “Report Your Claim Today” with a phone number. Text below stated, “Why Call UK Motor Claims? Using UK Motor Claims to manage your claim provides a number of benefits - Protect Your No Claims Bonus - By using our services, your insurer will not be in a position to deduct your excess. Provide a Replacement Vehicle within 24 Hours - We have a nationwide network of replacement vehicle suppliers to get you back on the road. Free Claims Management Service – We won’t ask you to pay anything to handle your claim.” Text under the heading “Had an Accident? Here is what to do” stated, “[…] Stop the car as soon as possible and switch on your hazard lights […] Call Us Report the accident to UK Motor Claims to manage your claim on your behalf. Report your claims here.” Further text near the bottom of the page under the heading “What do UK Motor Claims do?” stated, “UK Motor Claims offer a full first notification of loss service when you’ve been involved in a road traffic accident, that is not your fault. After taking the initial notification of the accident, UK Motor Claims will fully investigate the accident on your behalf, attempting to confirm liability for the accident in your favour and ensure all parties involved are notified of the accident.”
Issue
The ASA challenged whether the ads misled in relation to the nature of the service.
Response
iRevolution Claims Ltd t/a UK Motor Claims said they offered a 24-hour, 365 days a year telephone service specialising in the first notification of loss of vehicle insurance claims. Customers calling them fell into two categories: fault claimants and non-fault claimants. Fault claimants were those who had caused the accident and, in those cases, customers were directed to contact their own insurer to handle the claim. Non-fault claimants, where the customer was not responsible for the accident, would be assisted to find a solution for their claim. In all cases, the consumer’s insurer and that of the third party was notified via email of the claim. UK Motor Claims said they would organise recovery and repairs of the vehicle, as well as a temporary replacement vehicle, if necessary.
They would also recommend a solicitor for any personal injury claims and run the case until settlement to ensure all possible customer uninsured losses were recovered. Those services were offered free of charge to the customer who contacted them because they would be paid for by the insurance company of the third party who was at fault.
UK Motor Claims said the service they provided was free to the customer. Any settlement was paid to their business partners who in turn paid them an amount for their involvement. Because the claim was against the third-party insurer, customers would protect their no-claims status on their own insurance policy and would not be required to pay any excess on their policy. If it was subsequently discovered that the consumer who contacted them was at fault, they would immediately notify the insurer (who was already informed of the incident) so they could take over the running of the claim against the customer’s own policy.
They were paid by their business partners in the claims process, for example, for repair networks, recovery agents and vehicle hire specialists. They believed that often in a non-fault situation, third-party insurers would attempt to reduce the claim value by not offering services which should be made available, and the customer was often unaware that they could ask for those services. They said they were able to assist consumers by ensuring they had access to the types of vehicles and services they needed. However, while many did not, if a customer had cover for those elements through their own insurer, they would encourage them to take those benefits directly with them.
UK Motor Claims said customers had the freedom to choose who they approached to pursue a claim after an accident and they always pointed out their available options, but customers did not have to approach their insurance provider directly, as they were able to do that as part of the service. They made clear to consumers during the initial call to them that they were not an insurance provider but offered a service to assist them in handling a claim. They believed they enabled their customers access to a better claims process by working for them to acquire the solution they needed.
UK Motor Claims said ads appearing via Google search results had limited space to promote their services and they had tried to make the most of that limited space, but their website went into more detail of what they offered to consumers. They said they were no longer advertising via the ukmotorclaims.co.uk website.
Assessment
Upheld
Ads (a) and (c) stated, “Car Insurance Claim – Accident Claim Specialists”, “Call Now for Immediate Assistance” and “Report a Car Accident – Car Accident Claim Helpline”. Ad (d), the landing page, stated, “Report Your Claim Today”.
The ASA considered that consumers involved in an accident, were generally likely to be in a hurry to get assistance and might search online for such help shortly, if not immediately, after the accident, when they were likely to be particularly vulnerable. While the claims were ambiguous about the service offered, we considered that consumers were likely to understand from the ads that they could contact UK Motor Claims in the event of a car accident for assistance in making an insurance claim. We further considered that with the exception of ad (b), which stated, “Non-Fault Accident? Call Us Now”, the ads suggested that anyone who had an accident would be able to use the advertised service.
We noted, however, that UK Motor Claims only handled non-fault accident claims, and understood that at-fault consumers who called them would be redirected to contact their insurer. That was not referenced in ads (a) and (c). Ad (d) included the claim “UK Motor Claims offer a full first notification of loss service when you’ve been involved in a road traffic accident, that is not your fault”, but that appeared only in a paragraph at the bottom of the landing page. We considered its position and the prominence of the advertiser’s phone number at the top of the landing page meant that information was likely to be overlooked by consumers, who might in any case have called the advertiser before scrolling further. We therefore considered that ads (a), (c) and (d) did not make the non-fault accident limitation clear and instead implied that UK Motor Claims dealt with all accident claims.
We acknowledged that the search result ads were limited by space but noted that ad (b) did state that UK Motor Claims handled only non-fault claims. We considered that such information was material to a consumer’s decision to engage with the service, was easily and succinctly conveyed and should have appeared in all the search result ads.
Ad (d) included the claim, “Free Claims Management Service – We won’t ask you to pay anything to handle your claim”. We considered that consumers would understand that to mean they would not be liable for any costs in connection with making a claim. Ad (a) stated, “No Excess to Pay”, ad (b) stated, “No Excess to Pay & Protect Your NCB”, ad (c) stated, “No Excess to Pay […] Protect Your NCB” and ad (d) stated, “Using UK Motor Claims to manage your claim provides a number of benefits - Protect Your No Claims Bonus - By using our services, your insurer will not be in a position to deduct your excess”. We considered that the ads’ emphasis on consumers not paying a policy excess and protecting their no-claims bonus, gave the impression that it was always financially more advantageous for consumers to use UK Motor Claims service to handle their accident claim than their insurer.
However, we understood that consumers who claimed through an accident claims management company could incur additional costs that they would not usually be liable for under their insurance policy. We understood that the basis of the “free” claim in ad (d) was that no costs were payable because they were recovered from the third party via their insurer and UK Motor Claims were paid by the businesses to who consumers were referred. However, we also understood that consumers became liable for costs when they entered into a credit agreement, for example, when a replacement car was arranged. While typically costs would be met by the third-party driver’s insurer, that could not be guaranteed. For example, the fault for the accident might be disputed and need to be established, not necessarily successfully, or the level of car hire charges might be disputed. In cases where the third-party’s insurer would not pay, we understood that consumers could be responsible for the costs already incurred, such as vehicle recovery, repairs, storage or a replacement vehicle. We therefore considered that the implication that no costs were payable by consumers, or that it was always financially beneficial to use the service over an insurer, was likely to mislead.
Ad (b) featured a phone number but did not reference the website or include a URL. We considered that meant consumers who saw that ad were likely to have phoned UK Motor Claims and therefore would not have accessed additional information about the nature of the service which might have appeared on the landing page prior to phoning the advertiser. In any event, we noted that details of the additional costs a consumer might incur as a result of claiming through an accident management company instead of their insurance provider, was not included on the landing page. We considered that information was also material to understanding the nature of the service, and should have appeared in the search ads, or clearly on the landing page.
Because the ads did not make that information clear to consumers, and ads (a), (c) and (d) did not make the non-fault limitation clear, we concluded that they misled in relation to the nature of the service being offered.
Ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 and 3.3 (Misleading advertising), and 3.9 (Qualification).
Action
Ads (a), (b), (c) and (d) must not appear again in the form complained of. We told iRevolution Claims Ltd t/a UK Motor Claims to ensure that their future ads made clear to consumers the nature of their service, including in relation to non-fault accidents, and that they did not imply that there was no cost to the consumer if that was not the case.
