Resolution statement – 03425-25 Department for Energy Security and Net Zero v Daily Express

Summary of Complaint

1. Department for Energy Security and Net Zero complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that Daily Express breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Millions face energy bills rip-off”, published on 21 August 2025

2. The article, which as a front page splash and continued on pages 4 and 5, reported on a forecast that the energy price cap would increase in October 2025. The standfirst reported “Households will pay £300 a year more under Labour as price cap set to rise again”. The article opened by reporting:

“Millions face being ‘ripped off’ as energy bills are set to rise again despite Labour vows to cut them, campaigners warn.

Price cap hikes mean households may be having to find nearly £300 more a year than when the party took power a year ago.”

“Since then the cap has jumped four times, even though Rachel Reeves promised in the election to take £300 off bills by 2030. Critics say her policies are driving them up.

Forecasts from energy researchers Cornwall Insight show the Ofgem cap is set to rise by 1% in October, pushing the average annual bill from £1,720 to £1,737.”

A version of the article also appeared online, under the headline “HOUSEHOLDS TO PAY £300 MORE PER YEAR UNDER LABOUR IF ENERGY PRICE CAP RISES AGAIN”.

The online version also reported that households would pay “£300 more per year under Labour if [the] energy price cap rises again”, and “Fresh forecasts from Cornwall Insight show the Ofgem price cap may rise by 1% in October, pushing the average annual bill from £1,720 to £1,737.

3. Following the publication of the article, and prior to contacting IPSO, the complainant contacted the publication directly to question how the publication had reached the £300 figure. It said Ofgem’s price cap was set at £1,568 a year as of July 2024, and Cornwall Insight had forecast it could be £1,737 a year from October 2025 – a difference of £169.

4. In response, the publication changed the online headline to “Households pay £300 more per year under Labour as energy cap set to rise again”. The publication said that it had reached the £300 figure by comparing the energy price cap in July 2024 - £1,568 – with the April 2025 price cap, £1,849.. The article reported customers were paying “nearly” £300 more, which it said was supported by the £281 difference.

5. The complainant said the publication’s comparison was entirely inaccurate when reporting on a future price cap rise. The complainant subsequently complained to IPSO that the article was inaccurate on the above points.

6. The complainant also said the amended online article was still inaccurate. At the time of publication, households were not paying “£300 more per year”as the price cap was £1,720 in summer 2025– a £152 increase from the July 2024 price cap. It said the point of comparison the publication had chosen – April 2025 to June 2025 - was out of date at the time of publication.

7. The publication considered the updated headline to be accurate. It said households were currently paying an average of £300 more per year compared to last year, when comparing July 2024 to April 2025, and the price cap was set to rise again, by 1%, as reported in the article. The update headline also did not report the £300 figure was forecasted.

Relevant Clause Provisions

Clause 1 (Accuracy)

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and — where appropriate — an apology published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence should be as required by the regulator.

iii) A fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given, when reasonably called for.

iv) The Press, while free to editorialise and campaign, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

Mediated Outcome

8. The complaint was not resolved through direct correspondence between the parties. IPSO therefore began an investigation into the matter.

9. During IPSO’s investigation the publication offered to publish a series of corrections. It offered to amend the online headline to read: “Household energy price cap expected to rise again”. It offered to publish the following as a standalone correction in its online Corrections and Clarifications, first appearing on the homepage for 24 hours:

"Households to pay £300 more per year under Labour" - A correction

A previous version of our article published on 20 August was headlined "Households to pay £300 more per year under Labour if energy price cap rises again", and incorrectly reported that "it means families will be paying nearly £300 more a year than when Labour took power last summer”. This article used the April 25 energy price cap, which was no longer in place. The difference in the price cap from July 24 was £152, not £300. The forecast the article used would have made this £169. It was therefore incorrect to report that households “pay” or “will” pay” a further £300. We are happy to clarify this and apologise for the error. The article was amended accordingly on 21 August and can be found here [LINK].

10. It also offered to publish the following correction on the online article itself, beneath the headline:

A previous version this article was headlined "Households to pay £300 more per year under Labour if energy price cap rises again", and incorrectly reported that "it means families will be paying nearly £300 more a year than when Labour took power last summer”. This article used the April 25 energy price cap, which was no longer in place. The difference in the price cap from July 24 was £152, not £300.

The forecast the article used would have made this £169, therefore it was incorrect to report that households “pay” or “will” pay” a further £300. We are happy to clarify this and apologise for the error. The article has been amended accordingly.

Finally, it offered to publish the following correction in print, in its Clarifications and Corrections column on page 2:

Our article "MILLIONS FACE ENERGY BILLS 'RIP-OFF'" 21 August, incorrectly reported that “Households will pay £300 a year more under Labour as price cap set to rise again". The article used the April 25 energy price cap, which was no longer in place. The difference in the price cap from July 24 was £152, not £300. The forecast the article used would have made this £169. It was therefore incorrect to report that households “pay” or “will” pay” a further £300. We are happy to clarify this and apologise for the error.

11. The complainant said that this would resolve the matter to its satisfaction.

12. As the complaint was successfully mediated, the Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of the Code.

Date complaint received: 22/08/2025

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 11/12/2025