Advertising watchdog finds Quintain Living guilty of misleading advertising on three counts regarding its Wembley Park properties

 

The Advertising Standards Authority  (ASA)  today upheld three complaints made about Quintain Living, the private landlord arm of developer Quintain Ltd.

Summary of Council decision:

 

Three issues were investigated, all of which were Upheld.

Ad description

 

A website for property management company Quintain Living, www.quintainliving.com, seen on 12 February. A page titled “7 WAYS YOU’LL SAVE WITH US” stated “SAVE ON AVERAGE 56% ON ENERGY BILLS. According to Amber Energy these energy savings are based on comparing our EPC rating of “B” versus the average rental property rating of “D” in England & Wales of comparable apartment size.

 

Energy bills being defined as heating, lighting and hot water”. The page also stated “FREE SUPERFAST WIFI. Save £477 per year [“Save £477 per year” in bold] according to uSave – the average UK superfast broadband (30mbps or above) is £39.75/mth. Ours is included, set up ready to go and is 250mbps on all buildings except Alto, Montana & Dakota on 60mbps”. It further stated, “FREE WORK FROM HOME AREAS”.

 

Issue

 

The complainant challenged whether the following claims were misleading and could be substantiated:

1. “SAVE ON AVERAGE 56% ON ENERGY BILLS”;
2. “FREE SUPERFAST WIFI”; and
3. “FREE WORK FROM HOME AREAS”.

 Quintain Living website today still advertising 'Free superfast Wifi' and 'Free work from home areas'

Response

1. Quintain Living Ltd explained that their energy savings claim was based on comparing their Energy Performance Certificate (EPC) rating of “B” compared to the average rental property rating of “D”. Those comparative ratings remained correct and when they originally made the claim, in line with their ongoing policy, their tariff was no more expensive than the best value tariff for a one-year fix from an energy supplier with at least one per cent of the UK market. However, from April 2023 to April 2024, they had been unable to meet that target, because the Energy Price Guarantee, a government-backed subsidy designed to mitigate the sharp increase in energy costs, had not been extended to consumers supplied via commercial landlords. They said they would change the claim to focus on the energy efficiency of the apartments rather than a monetary saving going forward.
   
2. Quintain Living accepted that the use of the word “free” in relation to the WiFi claim was not in line with the Council of Advertising Practice (CAP Code), because the WiFi was included in the package. They said they would change the wording so it stated the WiFi was “included” rather than “free”. They explained that the claim only featured on one webpage.
   
3. Quintain Living said they had free open plan work-from-home areas for residents in all their developments, which were open to residents on a first-come, first-served basis. They further stated that they had additional higher quality work-from-home areas which could be hired for a fee. They said that the claim featured on one isolated webpage.

 

Assessment

 

1. Upheld

 

The ASA considered consumers would understand the claim “SAVE ON AVERAGE 56% ON ENERGY BILLS”, which appeared beside explanatory text, to mean that they would save 56% on their energy costs against the average comparable energy bill by renting through Quintain Living. The ASA acknowledged Quintain Living’s statement that the claim had been inaccurate from April 2023 to April 2024, and we welcomed their willingness to amend it. 

 

However, we had not received any evidence to demonstrate that the claim that consumers could save 56% on average on energy bills was accurate when the ad was seen or previously.

We therefore concluded that it was misleading. On that point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.7 (Substantiation).

 

2. Upheld

 

The CAP Code stated that marketers must not describe an element of a package as "free" if that element was included in the package price unless consumers were likely to regard it as an additional benefit because it had recently been added to the package without increasing its price.

 

We considered consumers would understand the claim “FREE SUPERFAST WIFI” to mean that the WiFi was genuinely free and therefore not included in the rent payments or other charges. We acknowledged Quintain Living’s explanation that the WiFi was included in the package price and was therefore not technically “free”.

 

Given that, we concluded that the claim “FREE SUPERFAST WIFI” was misleading.
 

On that point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.25 (Free).

 

3. Upheld

 

We considered consumers would understand the claim “FREE WORK FROM HOME AREAS” to mean that the areas were genuinely free and therefore not included in the rent payments or other charges. We acknowledged Quintain Living’s comment that there were some work-from-home areas which were available to all residents without a hire fee, and some higher quality options which could be hired for a cost. However, we understood that those work-from-home areas which did not require a hire fee were in any case included in the package cost. Given that those work-from-home areas were not therefore genuinely free, we concluded that the claim “FREE WORK FROM HOME AREAS” was misleading.

On that point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 3.1 (Misleading advertising) and 3.25 (Free).

 

Action

 

The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Quintain Living Ltd not to describe an element of a package as “free” if that element was included in the package price unless consumers were likely to regard it as an additional benefit because it had recently been added to the package without increasing its price. We also told them not to mislead consumers about the average saving they would make on energy costs.

 

https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/quintain-living-ltd-a24-1244037-quintain-living-ltd.html

 

Wembley Park ward is not included in the Brent Council Landlord Licensing Scheme because it does not meet the Council's threshold for inclusion.