Their web site states "We are totally impartial" on the main page, and they are OFCOM approved as a comparison site. OFCOMs rules confirm that excluding some providers is likely to mislead.
We asked broadbandchoices.co.uk if they can list us and they say it would be logistically impossible to do so - yet somehow other comparison sites manage it - suggesting that it is logistically possible. I did suggest that maybe they could contact thinkbroadband of ispreview if they need advice on logistics ad both sites manage to list us!
So, they do not compare all of the best choices, they are not totally impartial, and they claim things are impossible when they are not. I wonder what else they tell people is also incorrect?
ASA said that the site had "natural search engine results" or some such and they could not help. They had to be convinced that my complaint was about the TV advert not the web site.
However, finally, today, I have a reply from ASA and they are taking on the case. It seems their next step is to contact Clearcast and the advertiser on this. Will be interesting to see what they say.
Odd, though, no reply from OFCOM on this, or indeed on other issues we have raised (such as the TPS). I wonder who one complains to about OFCOM not responding. I suppose we should keep a record of this so that we have an example to refer to of what is an acceptable level of response if ever we have another ADR where the main reason to pay compensation is slow responses to queries. If OFCOM can ignore queries or take weeks to reply, clearly that is acceptable. :-)
Ideal outcome from this: That we are listed on their site, even if only our consumer Home::1 package.