06496-24 Williams-Key v express.co.uk

Summary of Complaint

1. Alan Williams-Key complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that express.co.uk breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Rachel Reeves sends mortgage rates soaring to highest in 18 months after Labour budget”, published on 9 December 2024.

2. The article – which appeared online only – appeared beneath the sub-headline: “The average five-year fixed-rate mortgage leapt by 0.19 percentage points to 5.28% at the start of December, Moneyfacts research shows.” It reported:

“The average five-year fixed-rate mortgage rate jumped after Rachel Reeves' first Budget.

Rachel Reeves' first Budget helped push up borrowing costs, with the average interest rate on a five-year fixed-term mortgage jumping the most in over a year.

Between November and December this year the average five-year fixed-rate mortgage rate on the market recorded the biggest month-on-month jump seen since August 2023, according to financial information website, Moneyfacts.

At the start of November, the average five-year fixed-rate mortgage across all deposit sizes was 5.09%. Moneyfacts said by the beginning of December this had leapt up 0.19 percentage points to 5.28%.

It also reported the average two-year fixed-rate mortgage on the market jumped 0.13 percentage points from 5.39% in November to 5.52% at the start of December. Fixed mortgage rates are typically lower now than they were at the start of the year.

At the start of January this year, the average five-year fixed rate was 5.55%, while the average two-year fixed-rate deal was 5.93%.”

3. The complainant said that the article breached Clause 1 because the headline claimed that mortgage rates were at their “highest” in 18 months. The complainant said the article did not support the headline claim: the subheadline referred to “five year fixed rate mortgages”, and the article reported that the five year fixed rate mortgage had “recorded the biggest month-on-month jump seen since August 2023”. The complainant said that “the biggest month-on-month jump” in mortgage rates was not the same as the “highest” mortgage rates..

4. The complainant said that information on the Moneyfacts website showed that the December 2024 rate for mortgages was 5.28%, while the rate in June 2024 was 5.5% - thereby disproving the headline, as the rate was in fact higher in June 2024.

5. The publication did not accept a breach of the Editors’ Code. It said, firstly, that the disputed information had been provided by Moneyfacts – as the article made clear - which it had contacted following receipt of the complaint. Moneyfacts responded as follows (their emphasis):

“I’ve taken a look at the headline and I can see that the main point is further below in the piece, in that our average five-year fixed rate saw its biggest monthly rise since August 2023. […]

I can only presume the reader assumes the ‘high’ refers to the average rates themselves, which is not the case.

As per your article: The average five-year fixed-rate mortgage leapt up 0.19 percentage points to 5.28% at the start of December, Moneyfacts research shows. = This was the biggest m-on-m jump since August 2023.

+ Between November and December this year the average five-year fixed-rate mortgage rate on the market recorded the biggest month-on-month jump seen since August 2023, according to financial information website, Moneyfacts. = So, this is the jump reference."

6. Further, the publication said that the headline should not be read in isolation, and given that the article made clear that “the average five-year fixed-rate mortgage rate on the market recorded the biggest month-on-month jump seen since August 2023", it was satisfied the article was accurate, and the headline was not significantly inaccurate. It also noted that the subheading, and body of the article, immediately made clear the specific increase.

7. In response, the complainant stated that there was a “big difference” between mortgage rates, and mortgage rate monthly increases. Given the headline referred to the former, and the text of the article the latter, he maintained that the headline was inaccurate, and unsupported by the text of the article.

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.

Findings of the Committee

8. The Committee was clear that, while it considers articles in their entirety, headlines must not be misleading, inaccurate or distorted in and of themselves. Although the text of an article can support or clarify a headline, it cannot be relied upon to correct an actively misleading impression already given by a headline.

9. The headline had reported that mortgage rates had hit their “highest” in 18 months. The Committee noted that the article went on to report that the “average interest rate on a five-year fixed-term mortgage” had jumped the “most in over a year” – and that between “November and December this year the average five-year fixed-rate mortgage rate on the market recorded the biggest month-on-month jump seen since August 2023”. The article also attributed this information to the Moneyfacts.

10. However, the Committee considered that this was different to the headline claim – the headline reported that “mortgage rates” had “soar[ed] to [the] highest in 18 months”, not that mortgage rates had seen their largest month-on-month increase. Indeed, the complainant had also supplied evidence to the contrary - according to Moneyfacts , five year fixed mortgage rates had been higher in June 2024 than December 2024, and the publication had not disputed this.

11. The Committee further noted that the article itself contradicted the headline’s claim, given it reported that at the “beginning of December” the five year mortgage rate “had leapt up 0.19 percentage points to 5.28%”. - while “at the start of January this year [2024] the average five-year fixed rate was 5.55%”. This did not support the headline’s claim that, in December 2024, “mortgage rates [had] soar[ed] to [the] highest in 18 months”.

12. In light of this, the Committee considered that the headline was inaccurate, and unsupported by the text of the article. Given the headline did not accurately reflect the information set out in the article, the Committee considered that this constituted a failure to take care over the accuracy of the headline statement. This was a breach of Clause 1 (i).

13. Further, the Committee noted that the misleading information suggested that, due to the Government’s budget, mortgage rates had hit their highest in 18 months – it had regard for the importance of accurately reporting on the economy, and the impact that increased mortgage rates have on the day-to-day financial lives of the public. The inaccurate information had also been reported in the headline, thus increasing its visibility. In light of these factors, the inaccurate information was significant, and required correction under Clause 1 (ii). A correction had not been offered, and there was a breach of Clause 1 (ii).

Conclusions

14. The complaint was upheld under Clause 1.

Remedial action required

15. Having upheld the complaint, the Committee considered what remedial action should be required. In circumstances where the Committee establishes a breach of the Editors’ Code, it can require the publication of a correction and/or an adjudication; the nature, extent and placement of which is determined by IPSO.

16. The headline had inaccurately reported that mortgage rates were at their highest for 18 months. It noted, however, that the article did go on to make clear the correct position – mortgages rates had recorded their largest month-on-month increase, albeit the Committee considered this significantly different to the headline claim. Therefore, on balance, the Committee considered that a correction was the appropriate remedy. The correction should acknowledge that the headline had inaccurately reported that mortgage rates were at their highest in December 2024 than they had been over the prior 18 months. It should also put the correct position on record, namely that mortgages rates had recorded their largest month-on-month increase, however, mortgage rates had in fact been higher during the previous 18 months.

17. The Committee then considered the placement of this correction. As the inaccuracy appeared in the headline to the article, the correction should appear as a standalone correction in the publication’s online Corrections and Clarifications column, and a link should be published on the homepage for 24 hours before being archived in the usual way. In addition, if the publication intends to continue to publish the online article without amendment, a correction should be added to the article and published beneath the headline. If the article is amended, this correction may be published as a footnote.

18. The wording should be agreed with IPSO in advance and should make clear that it has been published following an upheld ruling by the Independent Press Standards Organisation.

Date complaint received: 10/12/2024

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 17/04/2025