News
Six Money Advice Service complaints rejected by the ASA
The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) this week revealed it will press ahead with some complaints lodged by financial services professionals about the Money Advice Service (MAS).
The watchdog said it is currently investigating three complaints about MAS’ TV ads.
The use of the word “advice” and the claims MAS is “independent and unbiased” and “set up by the government” are all under investigation.
However, these are some of the complaints the ASA said were not valid for investigation. The following examples are from an ASA letter addressed to adviser David Chubb.
1) “Free” is misleading
Some complainants said the claim MAS is free is misleading as it is funded by a levy on the financial services industry. The ASA said most viewers would understand the claim to mean the MAS website was free to use.
How to get your first-time buyer clients mortgage ready
Sponsored by Halifax Intermediaries
2) “Independent and unbiased”
Complainants said claiming MAS offered “independent and unbiased” advice would confuse viewers who would think MAS offered the same as an IFA. The ASA said viewers were only likely to understand this as meaning MAS is not affiliated to any providers.
3) “Unbiased” is a company
Complainants said the use of the word “unbiased” in the ad was unfairly taking advantage of the brand and reputation of Unbiased.co.uk, the IFA search engine. The ASA said this kind of association is unlikely. However, it is investigating the use of “unbiased” as it said this might lead people to believe MAS information is protected by professional indemnity insurance.
4) Example products are favoured
Complainants said the use of particular products in examples on the MAS website favoured particular providers. The ASA said the MAS website makes clear it is not recommending any particular product.
5) “How’s that for a breath of fresh air?” is unfair
Complainants said the use of the phrase “how’s that for a breath of fresh air?” when describing MAS unfairly denigrated other financial service providers. The ASA said most viewers would not interpret the words this way.
6) No mention of funding
Complainants said the ad did not mention how MAS is funded and this could be misleading. The ASA said: “the omission of that information was unlikely to mislead viewers to their detriment”.