The UK’s Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said recent instances of marketing by Toyota and Hyundai had attracted complaints and led to the ads being banned.

The advertising watchdog’s ruling could have ramifications for all car brands conducting electric vehicle sales not only in the UK but globally.

It said that the banning of the ads puts great onus on EV manufacturers to justify their charging claims and ensure consumers are aware of the conditions and variables involved.

As more and more EVs are finding their way into the hands of private motorists, the number of posts on social media complaining about charging times and range available not matching the stated range are increasing.  

Newcomers to the EV world are discovering that batteries in winter cannot deliver the range they deliver in summer. Owners also find out that charge they have paid for can leak from batteries when EVs are left idle for periods of time. 

For example the UK owner of a Volvo C40 recently complained online that even though it was showing fully-charged, the car’s instruments stated a range of only 180 miles when the specifications claimed a range of 270 miles.  

Given that the car itself was telling them that it could not match the claimed range when it was saying the battery was fully charged, then industry should brace itself for an avalanche of complaints to the regulators.

The ASA case in the UK revolved around investigations it conducted into two separate cases involving advertising claims related to the rapid charging capabilities of electric vehicles.

The first case involved Hyundai’s Ioniq 5, while the second case revolved around Toyota’s bZ4X electric vehicle.

In the Hyundai Ioniq 5 investigation, the ASA said it had complaints regarding marketing on its website, on YouTube and on a digital billboard at Piccadilly Circus in London.

The ads claimed that the EV could charge from 10 per cent to 80 per cent in 18 minutes using a 350kW charger. 

Complainants told the ASA that achieving the advertised charging rate was limited, especially in low temperatures, leading to the watchdog deeming the claims as misleading.

Hyundai defended the ads, stating its intention was to address consumer concerns about charging times during longer journeys and provided internal testing results and cited real-world examples to support its claim. 

A report by Automotive Management (AM-Online) in the UK said that the ASA upheld the complaints and said consumers would interpret the claims as consistent charging times. The ASA said that the ads lacked crucial information about factors affecting charging time and the limited availability of 350kW chargers, deeming them misleading.

The Ioniq 5 is listed on the Hyundai global website as having the same 18 minute recharge using a 350kW charger. It also shows that a 50kW charger will replenish the battery from zero to 80 per cent in 1.5 hours.

The second UK investigation involved a complaint against Toyota’s claim on its website that the bZ4X could reach 80 per cent charge in around 30 minutes with a 150kW fast-charging system. The complainant argued that the claim was unsubstantiated.

Toyota explained that the claim referred to the maximum charging power of the Toyota bZ4X model – which is not yet sold in Australia and is expected in the fourth quarter of this year – and provided real-world testing results to support it. It also highlighted variables that could affect charging times. 

However, the ASA upheld the complaint, stating again that consumers could interpret the claim as a guarantee of consistent charging times.

AM said that the advertising watchdog emphasised the need for Toyota to provide more specific conditions and acknowledged the limited availability of 150kW chargers.

The ASA ruled that the ad was misleading due to the omission of important information about charging time factors and charger availability.

In both cases, the ASA emphasised the importance of providing context and qualifying information in advertisements to avoid misleading consumers about product features and capabilities.

The ASA said the rulings highlighted the need for companies to substantiate their claims with specific conditions and ensure that ads accurately represent charging times.

Overall, the ASA investigations found that the advertising claims made by Hyundai and Toyota regarding the charging capabilities of their electric vehicles “were not adequately supported and lacked important qualifying information.”

The ASA said its rulings are aimed to protect consumers from potentially misleading information. The watchdog emphasised the responsibility of companies to provide accurate representations of their product features and capabilities in advertisements.

By Neil Dowling