The UK advertising watchdog ASA has today published its decision on a Transparency Group complaint against CurrencyWave.

The ad in question appeared on a website for CurrencyWave, www.currencywave.com, a foreign currency payment service, viewed on March 7, 2024.

The home page featured headline text that read, “CURRENCYWAVE SMARTER GLOBAL PAYMENTS. Further text said, “Transparent pricing, secure transactions” and included two buttons labeled “CURRENCYWAVE FOR BUSINESS” and “CURRENCYWAVE FOR INDIVIDUALS.”

It also included an image of an electronic tablet with text that read: “Cost Comparison Send Payment $75,000: Total Cost […]” and displayed the prices of the advertiser and four other providers. The text said: “The above costs were calculated using online exchange rates obtained on 25 October 2022 for sending an international currency transfer of $75,000 with SWIFT priority payment.”

Below, the text said, “Powered by: Currencyclloud A Visa Solution” and featured the Currencyclloud logo. Further text stated, “[…] CurrencyWave removes the complexity and high cost of receiving, storing and sending payments in multiple currencies and serves a growing market of businesses involved in global commerce.”

The page included an animated video and a voiceover stating: “CurrencyWave gives you instant online access to the wholesale foreign exchange market, allowing you to bypass expensive and outdated banking services […] We can negotiate significantly better exchange rates for you […] Your payments will be sent through a fully authorized FCA platform […] So if you want to navigate the foreign exchange markets more efficiently and save money, make CurrencyWave your international payment partner.”

The video included on-screen text that read “Authorized by FCA.” Further text below reads, “FCA REGULATED E-MONEY PARTNER”.

The small text at the bottom of the page said: “For customers based in the UK and the rest of the world, payment services for CurrencyWave are provided by The Currency Cloud Limited”.

The Transparency Working Group questioned whether the ad misrepresented that CurrencyWave:

  • provided the payment services because they understood them to be performed by CurrencyCloud; and
  • are regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA).
  • They also questioned whether the cost comparison information was misleading and could be substantiated.
  1. Upheld

The ASA recognized that the ad included the wording “Powered by: Currencycloud A Visa Solution” near the top of the home page. However, the Authority deemed to be “powered by” was ambiguous and did not explain the nature of the relationship between CurrencyWave and CurrencyCloud.

There were also references to CurrencyWave having an ‘FCA E-Money Partner’, which appeared under the heading ‘Use CurrencyWave with confidence’. The ASA did not consider that this claim was sufficient to make it clear that another company was responsible for handling payments or that consumers would have understood this to mean that CurrencyCloud was the company performing the payment services. The ASA felt it was information that should have been included up front.

The ad included footer text that stated: “Payment services for CurrencyWave are provided by The Currency Cloud Limited.” The ASA considered that the wording appeared in very small text and at the bottom of the page, and was therefore likely to be overlooked. Although, even if some consumers had seen it, it was insufficient to overcome the impression that the currency payment services were performed by CurrencyWave.

Because the advertisement gave the impression that foreign exchange payment services and financial transactions were provided by CurrencyWave when this was not the case, the ASA concluded that the advertisement was misleading and in breach of the Code.

At this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.9 and 3.10 (Qualifications).

  1. Upheld

The video did not mention CurrencyCloud and the ASA considered in this context, claims referring to FCA authorization and regulation would be understood by consumers to refer to CurrencyWave as regulated by the FCA.

However, the ASA understood that CurrencyCloud was authorized by the FCA, but CurrencyWave was not. At the bottom of the website text it said, “Currency Cloud Limited is authorized by the Financial Conduct Authority”.

As mentioned above, this wording appeared in very small text, placed at the bottom of the page, and therefore the ASA considered that it was likely to be overlooked. Despite this, even if some consumers had seen it, it was insufficient to overcome the impression that CurrencyWave was authorized by the FCA.

Because the advertisement implied that CurrencyWave was authorized by the FCA when it was not, the ASA considered that the advertisement’s claims and impression were likely to mislead.

At this point, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1, 3.3 (Misleading advertising), 3.9, 3.10 (Qualifications) and 3.50 (Endorsements and testimonials).

3. Validated

The ad featured a chart that compared $75,000 in shipping costs to CurrencyWave and four other companies, and included the amount saved if they used CurrencyWave over those other providers. The text stated that this information was obtained from exchange rates obtained on October 25, 2022.

The ASA noted CurrencyWave’s point that exchange rates were dynamic and subject to constant change. Therefore, the ASA considered that the use of exchange rate data obtained more than 12 months before the advertisement was shown could not give a reliable or accurate representation of the rates that consumers could expect to receive from CurrencyWave or from other companies.

Information explaining the basis of the cost comparison was in small text below larger, more prominent text. However, even if this information were more prominently reported, any pricing claims based on this data would be misleading.

The ASA also considered that for comparisons to be accurate, the monitoring of competitors’ exchange rates should be updated much more frequently. the ASA had not been provided with any evidence that this was happening.

The ASA therefore concluded that the cost comparison information was likely to mislead and breach the Code.

On this point, the ad breached rules 3.1, 3.3, (Misleading advertising) and 3.33 (Comparison) of the CAP Code (Edition 12).

The ASA decided that the ad must not appear again in the form complained of. The Authority told CurrencyWave Ltd to ensure they did not imply they were carrying out foreign currency payments and financial transactions if they were not. The ASA also told them not to claim or imply they were authorized by the FCA if they weren’t, and to ensure any future price comparisons were accurate, including using up-to-date exchange rates.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *