Note: This advice is given by the CAP Executive about non-broadcast advertising. It does not constitute legal advice. It does not bind CAP, CAP advisory panels or the Advertising Standards Authority.
Since 14 January 2005, general insurance advertising has been regulated by the Financial services Authority (FSA) under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Financial Promotion) Order 2005. General insurance includes household, motor (including car breakdown cover), travel, pet, payment protection, private medical insurance, term (life) assurance, critical illness and extended warranties. If they are unsure about the legislation they need to comply with, marketers should consult a solicitor or the Financial Services Authority’s Financial Promotions Review & Remediation Team. Please note, however, that the FSA does not pre-approve proposed financial marketing communications for authorised firms. Technical guidance is available on specific matters or rule interpretations only, not on the advertisement as a whole. See the FSA’s website,
www.fsa.gov.uk.
In brief, the Code covers financial marketing communications that are not regulated by the Financial Services Authority (FSA), the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) or other government bodies or agencies. The non-technical elements of insurance advertising, however, are nevertheless subject to the non-specific clauses of the CAP Code. Typically those elements have included taste and decency, social responsibility, fear and distress and offence (see Lifestyle Services Group, 24 August 2004, and Southern Rock Insurance Company Ltd, 16 November 2005).
The ASA may investigate complaints about the truthfulness of some claims that do not relate to the specific characteristics of the product. The ASA recently upheld complaints against RAC Motoring Service’s claim “Breakdown cover - whether you're the driver or a passenger in any vehicle, 24 hours a day, 365 days a year” on the grounds that the RAC policy did not include the driver or passenger of a taxi or private hire vehicle (RAC Motoring Services Ltd, 23 November 2005). Marketers should, of course, hold evidence to support such claims in line with Rule 3.7 of the CAP Code. In 2001, the ASA received complaints about an Admiral ad that had claimed women were better drivers than men. The ASA ruled that the claim was acceptable, because, in the context of the ad, readers were likely to interpret the claim to mean that women made fewer and smaller claims than men: an interpretation Admiral substantiated with documentary evidence.
Marketers are advised, however, that they should consult the FSA for clarification of its remit. Under FSA guidance, insurance advertisements should be clear and fair and not misleading. The CAP Code and the FSA’s regulations overlap and some broad elements of insurance ads fall within the FSA’s jurisdiction, including matters pertaining to advertisers’ identity, the comparisons of products, savings, prices and interest rates, the use of awards and superlative claims and the veracity of testimonials.
Also see entry on “Financial Products and Services”.
Last modified : 05 August 2010