Genesis Energy
Assessed 16 July 2026 under NZ · Medium confidence
Evidence last captured 29 August 2026 · oldest 7 August 2026 · next re-check due 7 August 2027
We contacted this company 2 times between 6 August 2026 and 12 August 2026, by email and phone. No reply received.
A grade rules on whether a public claim is substantiated. It is not a finding about environmental performance, truthfulness, or the merit of the business. HowLegit is not a licensed adviser and nothing here is legal or investment advice.
Where this sits
All 21 energy companies, assessed against the same checklist in the same window.
Genesis Energy ranks 6 of 21 in this sector by overall score, between 47.6% and 96.0%.
Findings
Twenty-two environmental claims were assessed, with sustainability positioning flagged for a disclosure gap. Genesis states it is powering a sustainable and thriving Aotearoa and working to create a low-carbon future powered by renewable energy, but its current generation mix is approximately 60–65% renewable, the lowest among the Big 4 gentailers. The messaging does not prominently disclose the company’s current renewable percentage alongside its aspirational targets.
Why this matters. The YouTube channel vision states "empower New Zealand's sustainable future through the use of renewable energy" without contextualising that Genesis remains NZ's largest thermal generator.
What closing this looks like
- Publish current renewable generation percentage on the sustainability landing page and in plan comparison materials
- Cross-reference Kupe gas field and LPG/natural gas products on electrification pages with contextual framing
- Publish the methodology underlying biomass emissions reduction claims (the "10% or less" figure) on the biomass page
- Update all current marketing materials to reflect the 2035 coal timeline, replacing any residual references to 2030
“Powering a sustainable and thriving Aotearoa”
Aspirational sustainability framing without disclosing current renewable generation percentage (60-65%, lowest among Big 4 gentailers). The gap between positioning and operational reality creates a disclosure gap under FTA s.9.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Help to create a low-carbon future powered by renewable energy”
The low-carbon aspiration is stated without a current renewable share for Genesis's own generation. The page names Huntly and the thermal fleet, so the position is not hidden, but no figure is published that a reader could use to judge the distance between the aspiration and the present.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Biomass lifecycle emissions are claimed to be significantly lower, around 10 per cent or less, than coal's, and the basis given is that international experience indicates it. The 2023 trial used 1,000 tonnes of imported Canadian pellets and the target is 300,000 tonnes a year, against a largest current global supplier producing around 60,000 tonnes annually, which Genesis states itself. The electrification pages make their comparison against the national grid at about 80 to 85 per cent renewable rather than against Genesis's own generation.
Why this matters. A customer reading the electrification pages learns what the national grid is, not what their own supplier is. The biomass figure rests on international experience rather than on a published method, and the volume it depends on is five times the largest supply that exists today.
What closing this looks like
- Name the source and method behind the around 10 per cent or less biomass lifecycle figure, or attribute it to the study it is drawn from
- Publish the supply pathway from the 1,000 tonne trial to the 300,000 tonnes a year the strategy needs, with the milestones and the dates it turns on
- Make the electrification comparison against Genesis's own generation mix as well as against the national grid
“Biomass lifecycle emissions significantly lower (around 10% or less) than coal’s”
Comparative environmental claim presented without disclosing the methodology underlying the figure. Under ISO 14021 s.5.3, comparative claims require verifiable methodology.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Biomass target: 300,000 tonnes/year from 1,000-tonne trial”
300x scale-up from a supply chain that does not exist domestically at the required volume. The largest global supplier produces approximately 60,000 tonnes annually.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Electrification pages compare fossil to electric without own-generation disclosure”
The comparison is made against the national grid at about 80 to 85 per cent renewable rather than against Genesis's own generation. A customer reading this page learns what the grid is, not what their own supplier is. The use of a national grid figure rather than Genesis's own generation mix is recorded as environmental context at diagnostic flag E-B rather than graded here: a consumer's emissions are determined by the grid, so the comparison is the correct one for the outcome being described.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Sustainability pages use nature imagery (native landscapes, hydro dams, solar panels) prominently, while Huntly Power Station, the company’s largest single generation facility by capacity at 953MW, receives substantially less visual prominence. The Reimagine Energy campaign positions Genesis as a future-oriented renewable company, while the current operational reality includes significant coal and gas generation.
Why this matters. This is a visual framing gap, not a factual misrepresentation, but the impression created may not match the company's current environmental profile.
What closing this looks like
- Give Huntly Power Station prominence on the sustainability pages proportionate to its share of generation capacity, alongside the hydro, wind and solar imagery
“Sustainability pages: nature/hydro/solar imagery prominence vs Huntly thermal plant”
Huntly Power Station (953MW, NZ’s largest thermal plant) receives substantially less visual prominence than hydro, solar, and wind assets despite being the largest single generation facility by capacity.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
A consumer navigating from sustainability pages to product pages would find no mention of Genesis’s generation mix or carbon intensity per unit of electricity sold. Genesis promotes home electrification while simultaneously selling natural gas and LPG products and extracting gas from its 46% stake in the Kupe offshore gas field. This narrative tension is not disclosed or contextualised on the consumer-facing website.
Why this matters. A consumer comparing Genesis's "electrify your life" messaging with the company's own gas and LPG product pages would find an unresolved narrative inconsistency.
What closing this looks like
- Link the Kupe joint venture and the bottled gas and LPG products from the sustainability and electrification pages, so one journey shows the whole portfolio
- State the generation mix on the consumer electricity product page, where the purchase decision is made
“Kupe gas field (46% ownership) not cross-referenced from sustainability pages”
Material environmental fact about the entity’s operations absent from the consumer sustainability journey. Accessible via About > Generation but not linked from sustainability or electrification pages.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Electrify your life messaging while selling gas and LPG products”
Unresolved narrative inconsistency between electrification promotion and fossil fuel product offering. The tension is not disclosed or contextualised anywhere on the consumer-facing website.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Several cross-channel inconsistencies were identified. The LinkedIn profile claims second place in Consumer NZ’s power survey, but Genesis received 64% satisfaction, the lowest among major power companies. The Energy Retailer of the Year 2025 award is prominently displayed while Trustpilot shows 1.4/5 and Google Maps shows 2.0/5. An ASA ruling (23/217) found Genesis misled and confused consumers regarding Power Shout eligibility.
Why this matters. The Flick competitor complaint about misleading sales practices adds to the cross-channel consistency concern.
What closing this looks like
- Show the customer review scores alongside the awards on every channel that carries the awards
“Energy Retailer of the Year 2025 displayed alongside Trustpilot 1.4/5”
The award itself is verifiable and is assessed as substantiated under C2. What is assessed here is that the channel carries the award without the customer review scores that sit beside it: Trustpilot 1.4 out of 5 and Google Maps 2.0 out of 5. The favourable measure is displayed and the unfavourable ones are not.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Power Shout promotional messaging (eligibility framing)”
The Power Shout eligibility conditions are published in the current offer terms and in a dedicated eligibility FAQ, which state that the customer must be an existing Genesis residential electricity customer on an eligible plan. The 2023 advertising standards ruling predates those terms, and is assessed once, under C6.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Genesis conducts annual materiality assessments across nine stakeholder groups, but several material social issues are absent from the website’s social narrative. The proposed reduction of up to 200 retail roles announced in October 2023 are not mentioned on careers or sustainability pages. Energy hardship programmes are well-documented but the company’s own 10–30% price increases during record profits create a material tension with affordable energy messaging that is not addressed.
Why this matters. Energy hardship programmes are well-documented but the company's own 10-30% price increases (March 2026) during record profits create a material tension with "affordable energy" messaging that is not addressed.
What closing this looks like
- Address the FY26 price increases within the energy wellbeing narrative, so the programme and the pricing decision appear on the same page
- Acknowledge the October 2023 retail operating model review on the careers page, alongside the current recruitment messaging
“Annual materiality assessments engaging eight stakeholder groups”
Three material social topics are absent from the public narrative, and each is evidenced here. Genesis proposed cutting up to 200 retail roles on 20 October 2023, falling across FY2024 and FY2025, over the same period its FY25 result reports net profit after tax of $169 million against $131 million and revenue of $3.7 billion against $3.1 billion. The local health effects of burning coal at Huntly are not addressed on any consumer surface. Nor is the relationship between the March 2026 increases, 10 to 20 per cent for most customers and 30 per cent for some, and the communities the energy wellbeing programmes serve.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Supporting energy wellbeing messaging alongside 10-30% price increases”
Energy wellbeing programmes are substantive but the relationship between pricing decisions and energy hardship is not addressed. 10-30% increases during record profits create a material tension.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
The Energy Retailer of the Year 2025 award is verifiable and is assessed as substantiated. The “simple, useful and reliable” service positioning sits alongside Trustpilot 1.4 out of 5, Google Maps 2.0 out of 5 and Consumer NZ satisfaction of 64 per cent, the lowest among the major retailers, so the available independent evidence does not support it. The Go Electric calculator is promoted on the homepage and its accuracy caveat sits in fine print below that promotion. The EVerywhere saving of up to 70 per cent is stated with the ChargeNet network it applies to.
Why this matters. A service promise is the claim a customer tests first, and here the independent measures point the other way. The award is real and is graded as such. What is unsupported is the broader positioning built around it.
What closing this looks like
- Publish a service standard naming the measures and response times Genesis holds itself to, so the simple, useful and reliable positioning can be tested against something
- Move the Go Electric calculator's accuracy caveat to sit beside the result it qualifies rather than in fine print below the promotional copy
“2025 NZEEA Energy Retailer of the Year award”
Verifiable award from the NZ Energy Excellence Awards. The specific claim is substantiated by the award itself.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Simple, useful and reliable service claims”
Independent review platforms rate the service well below the positioning: Trustpilot 1.5 out of 5 across 61 reviews and Google Maps 1.9, both checked 29 August 2026. Trustpilot records the profile as unclaimed and notes that Genesis has not invited its customers, so those reviews may not be representative, and 61 reviews is a thin sample against a retail base of this size.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
“EVerywhere: save up to 70% at participating ChargeNet stations”
The offer page carries the up to 70 per cent figure together with the ChargeNet public charging network it applies to. The saving and the network are stated in the same place.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Go Electric calculator with accepts no responsibility for accuracy disclaimer”
Tool promoted prominently on the homepage carries a significant caveat for a consumer-facing calculator. Disclaimer in fine print below promotional language. The prominence of the calculator's accuracy disclaimer is recorded as commercial context at diagnostic flag C-B rather than graded here: the qualifier is present, and prominence is assessed at C6.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
Genesis positions itself as “with you, for you”. No published service standard accompanies the promise that a customer could hold the company to, and the one independent measure available is Consumer NZ satisfaction at 64 per cent, the lowest among the major retailers. The regulatory context the brand operates in is recorded under diagnostic flag C-D rather than graded here.
Why this matters. An aspirational service promise carries weight only where a customer can see what it commits the company to. Publishing a service standard would let the promise be tested rather than taken on trust.
What closing this looks like
- Publish a customer service standard with the commitments and timeframes behind with you, for you, so the promise names something a customer can hold Genesis to
“With you, for you customer-centric brand promise”
The promise is not accompanied by a published service standard a customer could hold Genesis to. The positioning is aspirational and the pathway is not stated.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
Genesis publishes an annual Integrated Report, ESG Datasheet, Climate Statement, and Modern Slavery Statement, all with GRI alignment and external validation. SBTi has validated its net-zero by FY40 targets, including near-term Scope 1 and Scope 2 reduction targets by FY30. The evidence architecture across multiple reporting formats is the strongest checkpoint in the Environmental dimension.
Why this matters. This is the strongest checkpoint in the Environmental dimension.
“SBTi-validated net-zero by FY40 targets (Scope 1: 30% reduction, Scope 2: 25% by FY30)”
Externally validated by the Science Based Targets initiative with specific near-term and long-term targets against a 2021 baseline. Third-party scientific verification substantiates the claim.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Annual Integrated Report and Climate Statement published”
Multiple reporting formats published annually with GRI alignment demonstrate robust evidence architecture. Climate Statement follows TCFD recommendations.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
“ESG Datasheet with GRI-aligned metrics”
Quantitative environmental performance data published in standardised format. Enables external verification and comparison.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“We also input our views into collective advocacy through industry groups including the Climate Leaders Coalition, Sustainable Business Council, Business Energy Council and Electricity Retailers Association NZ.”
Genesis names the bodies it works through and does so in its own audited reporting, which is what this checkpoint tests. The sentence appears in the FY25 Integrated Report at page 73 and the FY22 Annual Report carries the same statement naming the Climate Leaders Coalition and the Sustainable Business Council. Naming the forums an organisation advocates through is checkable against those bodies' own published records, and the statement is specific about which ones rather than claiming a general commitment. Assessed as at 15 July 2026.
Captured 16 August 2026 · source page ↗
The Gen35 strategy targets 95% baseload renewable generation by FY35 and net-zero by FY40, substantiated by SBTi validation and a $1.1B renewable build-out programme. However, the original coal phase-out commitment (2018: coal-free by 2030) has been extended to 2035 with no firm end date, and the biomass transition requires supply chain scale-up that does not yet exist domestically. The repeated timeline slippage on coal creates a pattern of under-delivery against environmental commitments.
Why this matters. The aspiration is substantiated by SBTi validation and specific project investments ($1.1B renewable build-out), but the repeated timeline slippage on coal creates a pattern of under-delivery against environmental commitments that an ASPIRATIONAL claim assessment must account for.
What closing this looks like
- State a firm end date for coal generation at Huntly, or state the conditions the FY35 date depends on and what happens if they are not met
- Publish the biomass milestones between the 1,000 tonne trial and the FY28 displacement date, so the pathway behind the Gen35 target can be followed
“Gen35: 95% baseload renewable by FY35, net-zero by FY40”
Coal phase-out has slipped from 2030 to 2035 with no firm end date. CEO stated Huntly will keep investing to play a role into the future. Pattern of timeline extension undermines pathway credibility. The movement of the coal phase-out date from 2030 to 2035 is recorded as environmental context at diagnostic flag E-F rather than graded here: the pathway itself is substantiated by SBTi-validated interim targets and by assets already built or under construction.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Biomass transition pathway requiring domestic supply chain at scale”
300,000 tonnes/year target from a supply chain that does not yet exist at scale in NZ. If biomass targets are missed, the 95% renewable target becomes contingent on unannounced alternatives. The scale of the biomass supply task is recorded as environmental context at diagnostic flag E-G rather than graded here: Genesis published the gap itself, which is substantiation of the pathway rather than a defect in the claim.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“.1B renewable build-out with named projects (Lauriston, Edgecumbe, Huntly BESS)”
Specific capital allocation with named projects demonstrates investment behind the aspiration. Capital commitment provides concrete evidence of transition intent beyond aspirational language.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“SBTi validation of emissions reduction targets”
Third-party scientific validation from the Science Based Targets initiative. SBTi validates targets, providing the strongest single piece of environmental credibility evidence.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Eighteen social claims were assessed. External certifications (GenderTick, Pride Pledge) are verifiable, but broader workforce claims lack specificity, no demographic statistics, diversity percentages, retention rates, or pay gap data are published. The DEI page states each business unit sets its own action plan and targets but none are disclosed publicly.
Why this matters. This creates a representation accuracy gap.
What closing this looks like
- Verify and update the LinkedIn Consumer NZ ranking claim with the most recent survey data
- Carry the workforce measures already published in the FY25 Integrated Report, the gender pay gap, the 40:40:20 representation target and women in senior leader roles, onto the culture and DEI page where a reader meets the description
- Add a section addressing energy affordability and the relationship between price increases and energy wellbeing outcomes
“Proud of our positive culture”
Genesis publishes the data this positioning rests on, in its FY25 Integrated Report rather than on the culture page: a gender pay gap, a 40:40:20 gender representation target, women in senior leader roles at 43 per cent, and an employee engagement score of 79 per cent. The claim is substantiated by the entity's own reporting.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“GenderTick accredited”
Verifiable external certification. GenderTick accreditation can be independently confirmed.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Pride Pledge signatory”
Verifiable external commitment. Pride Pledge membership is publicly confirmable.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“DEI page: business units set own action plans and targets”
The FY25 Integrated Report sets out the three focus areas each business unit plans against, Gender Balance, Ethnic Representation and Belonging, with targets recorded against each and senior leader gender representation reported as a measure. The targets are disclosed, in the report rather than on the DEI page.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Genesis publishes a comprehensive policy suite including Human Rights, DEI, Supplier Code of Conduct, and Consumer Care policies, along with Nature and Water position statements. The company produces a Modern Slavery Statement despite NZ not yet mandating one. Policy documents are PDFs linked from a hub page rather than summarised on-page, requiring multiple downloads to understand actual commitments.
Why this matters. The gap is that policy documents are PDFs linked from a hub page rather than summarised on-page, a consumer would need to download and read multiple documents to understand the company's actual commitments.
“Comprehensive policy suite published (Human Rights, DEI, Supplier Code, Consumer Care, Nature, Water)”
Publicly accessible policy architecture exceeds NZ legal requirements. Modern Slavery Statement published voluntarily. GRI-aligned reporting demonstrates proactive risk disclosure.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
The energy wellbeing programme is substantive, with a formal definition, stated funding priorities, and named partnerships including Vinnies Hamilton, Nau Mai Ra, and Haurere Energy Solutions. Standard Terms include specific vulnerability protections: no disconnection for medically dependent customers, nomination of alternate contacts, and prohibition on weekend, holiday, and severe weather disconnections.
Why this matters. The claims are substantiated by named programmes with specific outcomes (20,000 kWh solar at Tuai School).
“Energy wellbeing programme with named partnerships (Vinnies Hamilton, Nau Mai Ra, Haurere)”
Substantive programme with specific outcomes including 20,000 kWh solar at Tuai School. Named partnerships with verifiable organisations substantiate the claim.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Hardship support team Te Tira Manaaki o Kenehi”
Named team with visible accessibility. Specific description of support pathway demonstrates operational commitment beyond generic assurance.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Standard Terms: vulnerability protections (medically dependent, disconnection rules)”
Consumer protections exceed minimum regulatory requirements. 3-day exit notice, 30-day price change notification, prohibition on weekend/holiday disconnection.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Te reo Maori is integrated throughout community pages within a genuine bicultural business framework (Te Wao Nui, Te Tira Manaaki o Kenehi, Te Ropu Maori employee network). Cultural claims are substantiated by specific, named Maori partnerships including the Ngati Rangi Kiwi Forever programme and mana whenua trap-and-transfer for tuna.
Why this matters. The cultural integrity is supported by specific, named relationships rather than generic imagery.
“Te Wao Nui framework with te reo Maori integration across community pages”
Substantive bicultural approach with named Maori partnerships (Ngati Rangi Kiwi Forever, mana whenua trap-and-transfer, Haurere Energy Solutions, Te Ropu Maori network).
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Employee networks and community investment in Maori-led initiatives”
Te Ropu Maori employee network and community investment in rangatahi and tamariki programmes. Cultural integration supported by specific named relationships rather than generic imagery.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
The EVHome night rate and the petrol equivalent are both qualified where they are made. The 50 per cent night rate is footnoted as applying only to the Genesis variable rates portion, not to the daily fixed charge and not to appliances on a controlled meter. The $1.60 per litre equivalent is footnoted as based on off-peak charging including road user charges, with the calculation detail attributed to EECA. Two related items about how pricing is reached are recorded under diagnostic flag C-G.
Why this matters. A saving or price claim that carries its own conditions on the same page lets a customer judge the offer without hunting for them. Both claims assessed here do that.
What closing this looks like
- Link to the Electricity Authority's Billy comparison tool from Genesis's pricing pages
- Publish the methodology behind the EVHome "$1.60 per litre equivalent" and "$3.00 per 100km" claims on the EV plan page
- Review all current promotional materials against the ASA 23/217 ruling to ensure eligibility conditions are prominently disclosed
- Disclose the prompt payment discount restructure (from 10% unconditional to 9% conditional) on pricing pages with comparison framing
“EVHome plan 50% off variable rates 9pm-7am”
The night-rate claim is qualified on the same page. The footnote states the rates apply only to the Genesis variable rates portion, not to the daily fixed charge and not to appliances on a controlled meter. A reader of this page can see the scope of the offer.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Equivalent of $1.60 per litre EV charging cost claim”
The comparison is footnoted where it is made. Genesis states it is based on charging at off-peak rates and including road user charges, and attributes the full calculation detail to EECA.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Both EV cost comparisons publish their basis. The $1.60 per litre equivalent is footnoted as based on off-peak charging including road user charges, with the calculation detail attributed to EECA. The $3 per 100km overnight and up to $10 per 100km fast charge figures are given with an average of 25 to 30km a day and a 30c per litre petrol benchmark, and a stated dependency on the model and the plan.
Why this matters. A comparative cost claim is only useful to a customer if they can see what it assumes. Both comparisons name their assumptions on the page that makes them.
“EVHome compares EV charging to petrol ($1.60 per litre equivalent)”
The comparison is footnoted where it is made, on the basis of off-peak charging including road user charges, with the calculation detail attributed to EECA.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“$3 per 100km overnight charging and up to $10 for 100km fast charge claims”
The basis is published with the figures: an average of 25 to 30km a day, a 30c per litre petrol benchmark, and a stated dependency on the model and the electricity plan. A reader can follow the calculation.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Standard Terms are comprehensive and consumer-protective. Key protections are clearly stated: 30 days’ notice for material price changes over 5%, right to switch without exit fees if rejecting detrimental changes, no disconnection for medically dependent customers, and 7-day minimum notice before disconnection. The EVHome plan states leave anytime, no exit fee.
Why this matters. The EVHome plan states "leave anytime, no exit fee." Overall, the contractual terms and guarantee framework is transparent and consumer-protective relative to the sector.
“Standard Terms: 3 business days notice to terminate”
Clearly stated consumer protection exceeding minimum regulatory requirements. Verifiable from the published terms.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“30 days notice for material price changes >5%, right to switch without penalty”
Consumer-protective terms clearly documented. Right to switch without exit fee when rejecting detrimental changes.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Solar buyback rate 12.5c/kWh clearly stated”
Specific rate clearly disclosed on the solar product page. Verifiable and transparent.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“EVHome plan: leave anytime, no exit fee”
Clear consumer-friendly commitment with no hidden conditions. Straightforward and verifiable.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
The broadband offer reads “Stay 12 months and we'll sort the modem” and carries an early exit fee if the plan ends inside that period. The commitment is presented as the benefit and the exit condition sits in the footnote beneath it. The low user daily fixed charge phase-in is disclosed separately, in line with the Government's plan for fairer pricing and linked to the MBIE decision. The prompt payment discount restructure is recorded under diagnostic flag C-G.
Why this matters. A twelve month commitment presented as a benefit asks a customer to price the cost of leaving from a footnote. Stating the exit fee beside the offer would let them weigh both at once.
What closing this looks like
- State the early exit fee beside the Stay 12 months and we'll sort the modem offer, so the benefit and the cost of leaving are read together
“Low user fixed charge phase-out increasing 30c/year until April 2027”
Genesis states the low user daily fixed charge is being phased in over five years in line with the Government's plan to create fairer pricing, and links to the MBIE decision. The change is disclosed where the pricing is shown.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
“Broadband offer: Stay 12 months and we will sort the modem, with early exit fees”
Both sides of the offer are stated on the page that makes it. The benefit reads "A high-spec modem on eligible 12-month plans" and the exit condition reads "Early exit fee if you end plan within the first 12 months", in the same footnote block as the shipping fee. An entry benefit disclosed together with a stated exit pathway is substantiated. The relative prominence of the two is assessed under C6 and recorded on diagnostic flag C-B.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Both disclosure items assessed here carry their conditions on the page. The EVHome 50 per cent headline is footnoted with the scope of the rate. The Power Shout terms set out the eligibility conditions, including that the customer must be an existing Genesis residential electricity customer on an eligible plan, and those terms postdate the 2023 advertising standards ruling on the same offer.
Why this matters. Prominence matters most where the condition decides whether an offer applies at all. In both cases the condition is published on the page a customer reads before acting.
“Power Shout promoted as free power — ASA found eligibility insufficiently disclosed”
The Power Shout terms set out the eligibility conditions, including that the customer must be an existing Genesis residential electricity customer on an eligible plan. The 2023 advertising standards ruling predates these terms.
Captured 7 August 2026 · source page ↗
“EVHome 50% off headline with Genesis variable rates portion only in smaller text”
The qualification sits on the same page as the headline. The footnote states the night rates apply only to the Genesis variable rates portion and not to the daily fixed charge.
Captured 29 August 2026 · source page ↗
Cite this
One company, with every graded claim, its own published wording and the dated capture each grade rests on.
You are here
The full analysis behind these grades: what the sector claims, how much of it holds up, and the seven findings that run across it.
Read it, free and without registration →
HowLegit, Genesis Energy — messaging integrity assessment. Energy sector register, assessed 16 July 2026. Overall B+ (74.3%). https://howlegit.com/register/Energy/genesis-energy A grade rules on whether a public claim is substantiated, not on its truth or on the merit of the business. Not legal or investment advice. Produced by HowLegit, which also sells audits commercially. The data on this page is public.
This entry is part of a complete sector scan. Companies not listed on the Energy register were not assessed — which is not the same as being cleared.