An estate agency has been forced to amend comparative advertising after the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled that a leaflet and social media post comparing its services with rival firms breached the advertising code.
The complaint concerned marketing by RE/MAX Property Specialists, operated by Billie Dunlop, which compared the Scottish agency’s service offering against three named competitors. The comparison claimed RE/MAX offered a range of features that competitors did not, including personalised social media campaigns, same-day viewing feedback and “skilled negotiations by an agent who knows your home”.
While the ASA accepted that some elements of the comparison accurately reflected differences in service models, it concluded that several claims were misleading because competitors also offered similar services or because the claims had not been adequately substantiated.
The regulator found that claims relating to personalised social media marketing, personalised sale boards and guaranteed same-day feedback could mislead consumers. It also ruled that some statements were subjective rather than objective comparisons and therefore failed to meet advertising standards requirements.
A second complaint was also upheld after the ASA concluded that the comparison was not verifiable. Although the marketing stated that it was based on research into competitors’ standard packages, it did not explain how the comparison had been conducted or provide enough information for consumers to check the claims for themselves.
The ASA ordered that the advertisements must not appear again in their original form and instructed the agency to ensure future comparisons with named competitors are objective, substantiated and verifiable.
The ruling highlights the challenges facing agents who use comparative marketing. While comparisons with competitors are permitted under advertising rules, firms must be able to demonstrate that claims are accurate, evidence-based and capable of being independently verified by consumers.
