The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2025
Bo-Rent claimed 'renting is environmentally conscious' — on ~3,000 diesel and petrol cars
Car-rental firm Bo-Rent put 'Huren is milieubewust' on ~3,000 diesel and petrol cars. The RCC ruled the claim an unsupported comparative sustainability claim.
Bo-Rent · 2025-04-15
What happened
Car-rental company Bo-Rent advertised on roughly 3,000 of its vehicles the claim 'Huren is milieubewust' ('renting is environmentally conscious'), printed around the image of a flower on the side of each car. Every car in the fleet ran on a combustion engine — diesel or petrol.
A complainant argued the claim was a false environmental assertion: a diesel or petrol rental car is not obviously environmentally conscious, and renting is not inherently greener than owning. The claim carried no further explanation of what it was comparing or on what basis.
The Reclame Code Commissie (RCC) held the statement to be a sustainability claim under the Code voor Duurzaamheidsreclame (CDR) that was insufficiently clear, breaching article 3.1 CDR, and recommended Bo-Rent stop advertising in that manner.
Bo-Rent appealed. The College van Beroep confirmed the first-instance decision but on changed grounds: it held the claim to breach article 7 CDR (comparative sustainability claims) instead, because 'huren is milieubewust' implies a comparison between renting and owning a car without stating between which aspects the comparison is made or providing the supporting evidence.
Why it happened
- A green claim on a fleet of diesel and petrol cars invited the obvious question of what made it green
- Implying renting beats owning without naming the comparison point left the claim unverifiable
- No evidence distinguished Bo-Rent's environmental footprint from that of its competitors
The lesson
A feel-good green slogan is a factual claim the moment it is printed. If it implies a comparison — renting versus owning — the ad must say what it compares and back it up.
Aftermath
The RCC first-instance ruling found Bo-Rent's 'huren is milieubewust' claim breached article 3.1 CDR as an insufficiently clear sustainability claim and recommended the advertising stop. On appeal the College van Beroep confirmed the decision but changed the ground to article 7 CDR, holding the claim an implicit comparative statement (renting vs owning) that did not state the aspects compared and was not substantiated, citing the CJEU 'average consumer' test (HvJ 14-11-2024, C-646/2). Bo-Rent was left with a confirmed misleading-advertising ruling over a slogan on its own fleet.
Sources
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
Nissan's '80 kW fast-charging' Townstar ad upheld as misleading by the Dutch RCC
Nationale Rijschool promised a licence in 8 days and free retakes — they weren't
OKQ8's 'Sweden's largest charging network with nearly 1,000 points' ruled misleading
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →

Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.