Background
Summary of Council decision:
Four issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.
Ad description
A paid-for ad on a browser news feed and a website for Save Money Market, seen on 1 June 2022:
a. The paid-for ad was headed “UK Residents Are Rushing To Get £28 Per Month Private Medical Insurance”, and featured an image of a man wearing medical scrubs and operating MRI scan equipment. Text at the bottom of the ad stated “Save Money Market | Insurance Quotes”.
b. The ad clicked through to a landing page on the Save Money Market website, www.savemoneymarket.co.uk, with the title “Affordable Private Medical Insurance”, and labelled “Advertorial”. Text stated “There has been a 55% increase in people waiting for NHS surgery and people are marching in the streets over its future. If you’re a patient, that means you could spend more time waiting for your operation than ever before […] There are more patients for the NHS to treat than ever before, and the system is at breaking point. This means you simply can’t be guaranteed the treatment you need in good time, and any condition you have now could quickly worsen. The good news? There’s an alternative - private medical insurance”.
Under the heading “But, I’m healthy - do I need it?”, text stated “In the present, you might be fine, but what if you become seriously ill in three months? Will the NHS be able to provide the care you need, quickly? Probably not. Private medical insurance will ensure you get the treatment you need as soon as possible. It’s a great way to invest in your future self”. Additionally, under the heading “What is private medical insurance?”, the page stated “This will provide you and your family with reassurance that you’ll get immediate attention when needed. With private medical insurance, your condition is far less likely to worsen thanks to a much speedier service than the NHS”.
The page included various links such as “Find your medical cover” and “Select your age below to get started”. Those links led to a questionnaire on the Save Money Market website headed “Save Money On Private Medical Insurance & Protect Your Loved Ones” and “Get Your Free Private Medical Insurance Quote”. Various personal details were requested including whether a person smoked or vaped, their name, date of birth, address, email address and telephone number. At the final stage when the form requested a telephone number, text stated “Final step… We may need to contact you to ask you some additional questions, and a clickable button stated “GET QUOTES”. On completion of the form the page displayed text stating “Thanks for your enquiry” and “We’ll match you to a dedicated FCA-authorised financial agent”. Under the heading “What happens next”, text stated “1. A qualified advisor will call you shortly on the number you provided. 2. Your dedicated advisor will compare Private Health Insurance providers free of charge. 2. You will then receive your personalised quotes to review”.
Issue
The ASA challenged whether:
1. ads (a) and (b) falsely implied that the marketer was acting for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession and did not make clear their commercial intent;
2. the claim “UK Residents Are Rushing To Get £28 Per Month Private Medical Insurance” in ad (a) misleadingly implied the product was in high demand; and
3. the price claim “£28 Per Month” in ad (a) was misleading and could be substantiated.
4. A member of the public, challenged whether the claims in ad (b) that the NHS could not quickly provide treatment needed and “any condition you have now could quickly worsen”, while private insurance offered “immediate attention when needed”, were misleading and caused fear or distress without justifiable reason.
Response
Pelham Health Ltd t/a Save Money Market did not respond to the ASA’s enquiries.
Assessment
The ASA was concerned by Save Money Market’s lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code, which was a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 1.7 Any unreasonable delay in responding to the ASA's enquiries will normally be considered a breach of the Code. (Unreasonable delay). We reminded them of their responsibility to provide a response to our enquiries and told them to do so in the future.
1. Upheld
The CAP Code stated that marketing communications must not falsely claim or imply that the marketer was acting for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession. It further stated that marketing communications must make clear their commercial intent if that was not obvious from the context.
We considered that the ads, particularly ad (b), presented Save Money Market as a website providing health insurance quotes from across the market. Ad (a) included the claim “Save Money Market | Insurance Quotes”, while ad (b) featured clickable text such as “Find your medical cover” and “Select your age below to get started”, with various options in age brackets such as “25-40 years”. The form collecting consumers’ personal details was headed “Get Your Free Private Medical Insurance Quote” and featured the logos of well-known insurance companies, alongside the statement “Compare thousands of medical insurance policies from the UK’s leading insurers”, which we considered suggested that Save Money Market provided insurance quotes. Text in small font at the foot of the form stated “By submitting this form you consent […] to be contacted by one of our panel of FCA Regulated Insurance Brokers to confirm your details and provide a comparison and quotation”. However, we considered that statement was not prominent enough to change the overall impression that the Save Money Market website provided the quotes directly.
Only after submitting their personal details for a quote were consumers notified that the information would be passed on to a third party who would contact them by telephone. The Save Money Market site did not provide or compare health insurance quotes, and we understood that Save Money Market were a lead generation company that would pass on consumers’ details to insurance brokers. We considered that this information had not been made sufficiently clear in the ads.
We concluded that the ads falsely implied that Save Money Market was acting for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession, and did not make clear its commercial intent to generate leads, and was therefore in breach of the Code.
On that point, the ads breached CAP code (Edition 12) rule 2.3 2.3 Marketing communications must not falsely claim or imply that the marketer is acting as a consumer or for purposes outside its trade, business, craft or profession; marketing communications must make clear their commercial intent, if that is not obvious from the context. (Recognition of marketing communications).
2. Upheld
Ad (a) stated “UK Residents Are Rushing To Get £28 Per Month Private Medical Insurance”. We considered that consumers were likely to understand the claim “Residents are Rushing” to mean that the advertised insurance product for £28 was in high demand in the UK, and there was an urgency to purchase the product due to it being new or scarcely available.In the absence of a response, we had not been provided with any evidence demonstrating that there was a high level of demand or a large volume of sales for the referenced insurance. We therefore concluded that the ad misleadingly implied that the product was in high demand.
On that point, the ads breached CAP code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation).
3. Upheld
The CAP Code required that price statements did not mislead by omission, undue emphasis or distortion, and that marketing communications stated significant limitations and qualifications.
Ad (a) included a price statement of “£28 Per Month Private Medical Insurance”. We had not been provided with evidence demonstrating that an insurance product was available at £28 per month. We also understood that the price of health insurance was dependent on various factors such as age, lifestyle and health circumstances the level of cover required. Ad (a) did not provide any further information about the referenced product for £28 per month, state the basis of the price claim or whether qualifying criteria applied. The ad also did not contain any means of signposting viewers to such information.
Ad (b) included a statement in small font at the foot of the page stating “* This is based off a non-smoking 25 year-old, with mid-level cover paying a £200 excess living outside of London. Office postcode, £500 outpatient 13th jan start date”. However, we considered it was not clear whether that information applied to the price claim in ad (a). Notwithstanding that, we considered the statement was not sufficiently prominent as it was on a separate ad and appeared at the bottom of a lengthy page that required scrolling in order to be visible.
We therefore concluded the claim “£28 Per Month Private Medical Insurance” was misleading because in addition to the lack of evidence to demonstrate that the price was achievable, the ads omitted any qualifying criteria on which the price was based, or otherwise did not make that information sufficiently clear.
On that point, the ads breached CAP code (Edition 12) rules
3.1
3.1
Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.
3.3
3.3
Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, the medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
(Misleading advertising),
3.7
3.7
Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.
(Substantiation) and
3.17
3.17
Price statements must not mislead by omission, undue emphasis or distortion. They must relate to the product featured in the marketing communication.
(Prices).
4. Upheld
The CAP Code required that marketing communications must not cause fear or distress without justifiable reason and must not use a shocking claim or image merely to attract attention.
Ad (b) included various claims that the NHS could not provide medical care or a treatment for serious conditions in a timely manner, including “But, I’m healthy - do I need it? […] In the present, you might be fine, but what if you become seriously ill in three months? Will the NHS be able to provide the care you need, quickly? Probably not”, “there are more patients for the NHS to treat than ever before, and the system is at breaking point”, and “you simply can’t be guaranteed the treatment you need in good time, and any condition you have now could quickly worsen”. While the ad also suggested that private health insurance provided “reassurance that you’ll get immediate attention when needed” and would “ensure you get the treatment you need as soon as possible”, and that “your condition is far less likely to worsen thanks to a much speedier service than the NHS”.
We acknowledged that consumers who were considering purchasing private health insurance would do so for a number of reasons, which might include concerns about the speed of NHS care. However, we considered the claims in the ad particularly focused on worst-case scenarios in terms of the risks not having access to private health services through insurance, such as the worsening of serious medical conditions. The ad also included absolute claims about the NHS such as “the system is at breaking point” and “The NHS is struggling” without providing further detail or explanation. We considered the claims in the ad suggested that NHS care was unlikely to be available if needed, and that in doing so the ad was likely to cause fear.
Save Money Market had not provided an explanation of the basis of claims relating to the performance of the NHS, including the implication that it would not provide timely treatment while private health care offered immediate medical attention, or any evidence demonstrating that was the case. We also understood that in some circumstances the NHS provided initial or emergency care to those with private health insurance, and that depending on the level of cover there were exclusions that applied to health insurance. Additionally, the claims in the ad were general, and it did not provide any clarification on the treatments or areas of the NHS to which it referred, or the source of that information.
We concluded that the approach taken in the ad, and the fear it was likely to cause, was not justifiable and therefore that the ad was irresponsible. Additionally in the absence of substantiation supporting the claims relating to the NHS, we also concluded the ad was likely to mislead.
On that point, the ads breached CAP code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising), and 3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation. (Substantiation) and 4.2 4.2 Marketing communications must not cause fear or distress without justifiable reason; if it can be justified, the fear or distress should not be excessive. Marketers must not use a shocking claim or image merely to attract attention. (Harm and offence).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told Pelham Health Ltd t/a Save Money Market that future ads must not imply they were acting for purposes outside their trade, business, craft or profession, and their commercial intent of generating leads must be clear.
Additionally, their marketing communications must not misleadingly suggest products were in high demand or include misleading price statements, and such price statements must state significant limitations and qualifications. Their future ads must also not cause fear or distress without justifiable reason and must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. They must also hold substantiation for their claims before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication.
We referred the matter to CAP's Compliance team.
CAP Code (Edition 12)
1.7 2.3 3.1 3.3 3.7 3.17 4.2 3.9
