Background
This investigation forms part of a wider piece of work related to online ads in the rail industry concerning "lowest" or "cheapest" price claims. See also related rulings published on 24th December 2025.
Ad description
A website for ScotRail, www.scotrail.co.uk, seen on 25 August 2025, featured a page with a journey planner tool, in which text stated, “Get cheapest tickets”. Text on the page’s main image stated “Book direct for our best price”. Another page titled “Find the right ticket” featured a tab labelled “Buy Tickets”. That tab could be clicked on to reveal a drop-down box with a journey planner, under which text stated, “Unbeatable on price”.
Issue
The complainant challenged whether the claims “get cheapest tickets”, “Book direct for our best price” and “unbeatable on price” were misleading.
Response
ScotRail Trains Ltd t/a ScotRail believed the claims “get cheapest tickets”, “book direct for our best price” and “unbeatable on price” were not misleading.ScotRail said the claim “Get cheapest tickets” appeared as a call-to-action button for consumers searching for a train journey. Clicking on the button returned a list of fares and times related to the relevant journey, and the cheapest available fare was highlighted in the results. If an advanced fare was available, the cheapest single price would be highlighted. They said the fare options returned by searches using their websites journey planner indicated the cheapest available fare, and whether split-ticketing was available for the selected journey. They believed the conditions for accessing split-ticketing were also made clear. ScotRail believed that because their journey planner provided search results which made it clear what the cheapest available fares were, the claim was not misleading.
ScotRail said the claim “Book direct for our best price” referred to the fact that consumers who booked directly with ScotRail always paid the lowest price they offered. They said that the rail industry operated under regulated fares with a centrally-controlled fares database, managed by the Rail Delivery Group (RDG), from which all accredited retailers sourced their ticket prices. They said they applied no additional booking fees to those standard fares, unlike some third-party retailers and competitors, which meant they could guarantee their best price when a consumer booked with them directly.
Regarding the claim “Unbeatable on price”, ScotRail believed that because they did not charge booking fees, their prices could not be beaten. They said that was further supported by their price promise, which meant that consumers were reimbursed if a genuine lower like-for-like Seasons or Anytime fare was found elsewhere. They also said that some discounts and reduced fares were only available when purchased directly from ScotRail. They acknowledged CAP guidance on “unbeatable” claims and had removed the claim to ensure greater clarity for consumers.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA considered that consumers would understand the claims “get cheapest tickets” and “unbeatable on price” to mean that by using ScotRail’s journey planner, they would be able to purchase tickets at the lowest available price for their chosen journey. We also considered the claims implied it was unnecessary to look for cheaper tickets elsewhere, and that the additional claim, “book direct for our best price”, added to the impression that Scotrail’s prices could not be beaten. We considered that those were “lowest price” (or “best price”) claims. As such, they had to be backed up by suitable evidence to show that ScotRail would always beat, and not merely match, competitors’ prices.
We considered that rail ticketing was complex, and most consumers were unlikely to have knowledge of the rules which governed how ticket prices were set. Overall, consumers were likely to understand that ScotRail was able to offer competitively priced tickets, which they did by monitoring their fares against their competitors, including third-party retailers. We therefore expected ScotRail to hold evidence to substantiate the claim ““get cheapest tickets”, “Book direct for our best price”, and “unbeatable on price”.
We understood that the framework in which train operating companies could set rail fares was set out by the National Rail Ticketing and Settlement Agreement (TSA), and that operators such as ScotRail were not permitted to create or sell their own fares outside of that framework. We acknowledged that ScotRail did not charge a booking fee and that their fare planner tool indicated the cheapest returned option, and whether split ticketing was available for the selected journey. We also acknowledged ScotRail’s view that the claim “Unbeatable on price” was not misleading due to the absence of booking fees and the existence of their price promise.
We understood some third-party retailers also did not charge a booking fee, which meant ScotRail could not beat competitors’ prices. In addition, although their website indicated whether split ticketing was available, we had not seen evidence to suggest that it would also beat split-ticketing prices offered by third parties. As stated, we considered the overall impression of the ad was that consumers would be able to find the cheapest ticket for a particular journey on the ScotRail website. As such, we considered that the claims “get cheapest tickets”, “Book direct for our best price”, and “unbeatable on price” discouraged consumers from searching elsewhere for cheaper tickets. However, they provided no evidence that, through purchasing tickets separately on the ScotRail website, they would always beat competitors’ prices.
We noted that ScotRail’s price promise only offered to refund the difference for certain ticket types, and did not guarantee that they would beat all competitors’ prices in all circumstances. In addition, we understood that the complainant had been able to find cheaper tickets for a journey using a third-party service other than those they had found on the ScotRail website.
We welcomed the changes ScotRail had made to their wording of parts of their website. However, because we had seen no evidence to demonstrate that consumers could obtain the lowest available price by booking directly with ScotRail, we concluded that the ad was misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained about. We told ScotRail Trains Ltd t/a ScotRail to ensure that they did not mislead consumers by claiming they could offer the lowest price available if that was not the case.
