Connect with us

Published

on

Three adverts for Shell that publicise its climate-friendly products have been banned for glossing over its “large scale” investments in oil and gas.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) ruled the ads created the impression that a “significant proportion of Shell’s business” comprised “low carbon energy products”.

The company misleadingly “omitted” information that oil and gas made up the “vast majority” of its operations, the ASA said.

Shell said it strongly disagreed with the watchdog’s decision and claimed the finding could slow the UK’s move towards renewable energy.

The three adverts in question showcased the renewable power that Shell provides and its clean energy services, including electric vehicle charging.

A TV ad from last June stated 1.4 million households in the UK used 100% renewable electricity from Shell. It also mentioned that the firm was working on a wind project that could power six million homes and aimed to fit 50,000 electric car chargers nationwide by 2025.

A video on Shell’s YouTube channel was captioned: “From electric vehicle charging to renewable electricity for your home, Shell is giving customers more low-carbon choices and helping drive the UK’s energy transition. The UK is ready for cleaner energy.”

Shell UK said it wanted the ads to raise consumer awareness about its range of energy products that were better for the environment than fossil fuels, and increase demand for them.

It cited research suggesting that 83% of consumers primarily associated the brand with the sale of petrol, arguing they would be “unlikely to assume that the ads’ content covered the full range of its business activities”.

One of the adverts banned by the ASA
Image:
One of the adverts banned by the ASA
A screenshot of one of the adverts banned by the ASA. Pic: Shell via ASA
Image:
A screenshot of one of the adverts banned by the ASA. Pic: Shell via ASA

In 2022, Shell spent 17% (£3.5bn) of its total capital expenditure (£20bn) on “low-carbon energy solutions”, which include renewable wind and solar power as well as things like electric vehicle charging, biofuels, carbon credits and hydrogen filling stations.

Why the ASA upheld the complaint

The ASA acknowledged that many people would associate Shell with petrol sales, as well as oil and gas production.

It said they would also be aware that many companies in carbon-intensive industries, including the oil and gas sector, aimed to dramatically reduce their emissions in response to the climate crisis.

Burning coal, oil and gas is the biggest driver of climate change, responsible for 75% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

The ASA said: “We understood that large-scale oil and gas investment and extraction comprised the vast majority of the company’s business model in 2022 and would continue to do so in the near future.

“We therefore considered that, because (the ads) gave the overall impression that a significant proportion of Shell’s business comprised lower-carbon energy products, further information about the proportion of Shell’s overall business model that comprised lower-carbon energy products was material information that should have been included.

“Because the ads did not include such information, we concluded that they omitted material information and were likely to mislead.”

It ruled that the ads must not appear again.

Read more:
Protesters try to storm stage at Shell AGM
Shell announces record annual profits

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Climate criminals!’ – oil firm protest

A Shell spokesman said: “We strongly disagree with the ASA’s decision, which could slow the UK’s drive towards renewable energy.

“People are already well aware that Shell produces the oil and gas they depend on today. When customers fill up at our petrol stations across the UK, it’s under the instantly recognisable Shell logo.”

Shell claimed that many people do not know about its investment in more eco-friendly options, such as its vast public networks of EV charge-points.

It added: “No energy transition can be successful if people are not aware of the alternatives available to them. That is what our adverts set out to show, and that is why we’re concerned by this short-sighted decision.”

Veronica Wignall, from activist network Adfree Cities, which raised the complaint with the ASA, said: “Today’s official ban on Shell’s adverts marks the end of the line for fossil fuel greenwashing in the UK.

“The world’s biggest polluters will not be permitted to advertise that they are ‘green’ while they build new pipelines, refineries and rigs.”

Fossil fuel companies should be banned from advertising at all given their role in the climate crisis, she added.

Watch The Climate Show with Tom Heap on Saturday and Sunday at 3pm and 7.30pm on Sky News, on the Sky News website and app, and on YouTube and Twitter.

The show investigates how global warming is changing our landscape and highlights solutions to the crisis.

Continue Reading

Business

Car manufacturers fined £461m for collusion

Published

on

By

Car manufacturers fined £461m for collusion

Major car manufacturers and two trade bodies are to pay a total of £461m for “colluding to restrict competition” over vehicle recycling, UK and European regulators have announced.

The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said they illegally agreed not to compete against one another when advertising what percentage of their cars can be recycled.

They also colluded to avoid paying third parties to recycle their customers’ scrap cars, the watchdog said.

Money latest: The many household bills rising today

It explained that those involved were BMW, Ford, Jaguar Land Rover, Peugeot Citroen, Mitsubishi, Nissan, Renault, Toyota, Vauxhall and Volkswagen.

Mercedes-Benz, was also party to the agreements, the CMA said, but it escaped a financial penalty because the German company alerted it to its participation.

The European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (Acea) and the Society of Motor Manufacturers & Traders (SMMT) were also involved in the illegal agreements.

More from Money

The CMA imposed a combined penalty of almost £78m while the European Commission handed out fines totalling €458m (£382.7m).

The penalties were announced at a time of wider turmoil for Europe’s car industry.

Manufacturers across the continent are bracing for the threatened impact of tariffs on all their exports to the United States as part of Donald Trump’s trade war.

Within the combined fine settlements of £77.7m issued by the CMA, Ford was to pay £18.5m, VW £14.8m, BMW £11.1m and Jaguar Land Rover £4.6m.

Lucilia Falsarella Pereira, senior director of competition enforcement at the CMA, said: “Agreeing with competitors the prices you’ll pay for a service or colluding to restrict competition is illegal and this can extend to how you advertise your products.

“This kind of collusion can limit consumers’ ability to make informed choices and lower the incentive for companies to invest in new initiatives.

“We recognise that competing businesses may want to work together to help the environment, in those cases our door is open to help them do so.”

Continue Reading

Business

Customers ‘protected’ as household energy supplier exits market

Published

on

By

Customers 'protected' as household energy supplier exits market

A household energy supplier has failed, weeks after it attracted attention from regulators.

Rebel Energy, which has around 80,000 domestic customers and 10,000 others, had been the subject of a provisional order last month related to compliance with rules around renewable energy obligations.

The company’s website said it was “ceasing to trade” but gave no reason.

Money latest: The many household bills rising today

Industry watchdog Ofgem said on Tuesday that those affected by Rebel’s demise did not need to take any action and would be “protected”.

Customers, Ofgem said, would soon be appointed a new provider under its supplier of last resort (SoLR) mechanism.

This was deployed widely in 2021 when dozens of energy suppliers collapsed while failing to get to grips with a spike in wholesale energy costs.

More from Money

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why is the energy price cap rising?

The last supplier to go under was in July 2022.

Ofgem said new rules governing supplier business practices since then had bolstered resilience.

These include minimum capital requirements and the ringfencing of customer credit balances.

The exit from the market by Bedford-based Rebel was announced on the same day that the energy price cap rose again to take account of soaring wholesale costs between December and January.

Try the Sky News cost of living calculator

Tim Jarvis, director general for markets at Ofgem, said: “Rebel Energy customers do not need to worry, and I want to reassure them that they will not see any disruption to their energy supply, and any credit they may have on their accounts remains protected under Ofgem’s rules.

“We are working quickly to appoint new suppliers for all impacted customers. We’d advise customers not to try to switch supplier in the meantime, and a new supplier will be in touch in the coming weeks with further information.

“We have worked hard to improve the financial resilience of suppliers in recent years, implementing a series of rules to make sure they can weather unexpected shocks. But like any competitive market, some companies will still fail from time to time, and our priority is making sure consumers are protected if that happens.”

Continue Reading

Business

Harrods challenges survivors’ law firm’s compensation cut

Published

on

By

Harrods challenges survivors' law firm's compensation cut

Harrods is urging lawyers acting for the largest group of survivors of abuse perpetrated by its former owner to reconsider plans to swallow a significant chunk of claimants’ compensation payouts in fees.

Sky News has learnt that KP Law, which is acting for hundreds of potential clients under the banner Justice for Harrods, is proposing to take up to 25% of compensation awards in exchange for handling their cases.

In many cases, that is likely to mean survivors foregoing sums worth of tens of thousands of pounds to KP Law, which says it is working for hundreds of people who suffered abuse committed by Mohamed al Fayed.

Mohamed al Fayed. File pic: PA
Image:
Mohamed al Fayed. File pic: PA

Money latest: Boost for holidaymakers amid ‘awful April’ bill hikes

Under a redress scheme outlined by the London-based department store on Monday, which confirmed earlier reports by Sky News, claimants will be eligible for general damages awards of up to £200,000, depending upon whether they agree to a psychiatric assessment arranged by Harrods.

In addition, other payments could take the maximum award to an individual under the scheme to £385,000.

A document published online names several law firms which have agreed to represent Mr al Fayed’s victims without absorbing any of their compensation payments.

More on Mohamed Al Fayed

KP Law is not among those firms.

Theoretically, if Justice for Harrods members are awarded compensation in excess of the sums proposed by the company, KP Law could stand to earn many millions of pounds from its share of the payouts.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

‘Many more’ likely abused by Fayed

A Harrods spokesperson told Sky News on Tuesday: “The purpose of the Harrods Redress Scheme is to offer financial and psychological support to those who choose to enter the scheme, rather than as a route to criminal justice.

“With a survivor-first approach, it has been designed by personal injury experts with the input of several legal firms currently representing survivors.

“Although Harrods tabled the scheme, control of the claim is in the hands of the survivors who can determine at any point to continue, challenge, opt out or seek alternative routes such as mediation or litigation.

“Our hope is that everyone receives 100% of the compensation awarded to them but we understand there is one exception among these law firms currently representing survivors who is proposing to take up to 25% of survivors’ compensation.

“We hope they will reconsider given we have already committed to paying reasonable legal costs.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Further claims against al Fayed

Responding to the publication of the scheme on Monday, KP Law criticised it as inadequate, saying it “does not go far enough to deliver the justice and accountability demanded by our clients”.

“This is not solely a question of compensation but about justice and exposing the systematic abuse and the many people who helped to operate it for the benefit of Mohamed al Fayed and others.”

Seeking to rebut the questions raised by Harrods about its fee structure, KP Law told Sky News: “KP Law is committed to supporting our clients through the litigation process to obtain justice first and foremost as well as recovering the maximum possible damages for them.

“This will cover all potential outcomes for the case.

“Despite the Harrods scheme seeking to narrow the potential issues, we believe that there are numerous potential defendants in a number of jurisdictions that are liable for what our clients went through, and we are committed to securing justice for our client group.

“KP Law is confident that it will recover more for its clients than what could be achieved through the redress scheme established by Harrods, which in our view is inadequate and does not go far enough to compensate victims of Mr al Fayed.”

The verbal battle between Harrods and KP Law underlines the fact that the battle for compensation and wider justice for survivors of Mr al Fayed remains far from complete.

The billionaire, who died in 2023, is thought to have sexually abused hundreds of women during a 25-year reign of terror at Harrods.

He also owned Fulham Football Club and Paris’s Ritz Hotel.

Harrods is now owned by a Qatari sovereign wealth fund controlled by the Gulf state’s ruling family.

The redress scheme commissioned by the department store is being coordinated by MPL Legal, an Essex-based law firm.

Last October, lawyers acting for victims of Mr al Fayed said they had received more than 420 enquiries about potential claims, although it is unclear how many more have come forward in the six months since.

Continue Reading

Trending