'AI Washing' Warning: UK Companies Misrepresenting Basic Automation as AI, Creating Regulatory and Professional Liability Risk
UK companies are systematically overstating the sophistication of their technology products by labelling standard automation tools as artificial intelligence, a practice communications professionals and PR executives are calling 'AI washing'. Public relations practitioners working across London and global agencies report that bosses in low-tech industries are increasingly demanding their products be pitched to journalists and investors as AI-powered, regardless of whether genuine machine learning or generative AI is involved. The phenomenon is commercially widespread: examples cited include a property company marketing a handheld building scanner as an AI product, shoe and genetics companies claiming AI-driven capabilities, and marketing teams inserting AI references into product names without underlying substance. One account director estimated that approximately 50% of AI-related press releases they are asked to distribute misrepresent the underlying technology. For commercial lawyers, the legal risk embedded in AI washing is significant and multi-dimensional. In the consumer and financial products context, falsely representing a product as AI-driven could constitute a misleading commercial practice under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 or, for listed companies making AI capability claims to the market, a market abuse risk under UK MAR (UK Market Abuse Regulation). Companies implementing AI washing strategies in investor-facing materials also face exposure under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 for misleading statements. The FCA has signalled increasing focus on AI-related marketing claims, and the AI washing trend is a direct precursor to enforcement action.
Why this matters
AI washing sits at the intersection of consumer protection, market abuse, and professional liability law — three practice areas that are already active and will become more so as regulators apply existing frameworks to AI-related misrepresentation. The FCA and CMA both have stated priorities around misleading AI claims in consumer-facing and investment-grade communications. The 'why now' driver is the investor premium currently attached to AI: with stock markets rewarding AI-adjacent businesses, the financial incentive to overclaim is acute, and listed companies are most exposed. For City firms advising on corporate communications, IPO prospectuses, and investor relations, the AI washing story is a live compliance risk requiring active counsel.
On the Ground
A trainee supporting an AI governance matter would draft an AI governance policy for a client clarifying the internal standard for what qualifies as AI in external communications, and prepare a regulatory impact assessment memo mapping the AI washing conduct against the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 and UK MAR to advise on enforcement exposure.
Interview prep
Soundbite
Calling a scanner 'AI-powered' in a prospectus is a market abuse risk — the FCA's AI marketing scrutiny is coming.
Question you might get
“A client wants to describe its product as 'AI-powered' in an IPO prospectus. What legal risks does that claim create, and what steps would you advise before the prospectus is published?”
Full answer
UK companies are systematically mislabelling basic automation as AI in a practice PR professionals are calling AI washing, with around half of AI-related press releases estimated to misrepresent the underlying technology. For commercial lawyers, the immediate risk is multi-jurisdictional: for listed companies, AI capability claims in investor-facing materials could constitute misleading statements under UK MAR or FSMA 2000; for consumer-facing businesses, they risk prosecution under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations. The wider picture is that regulators including the FCA and CMA have both put AI marketing accuracy on their enforcement radars, meaning AI washing is graduating from a PR problem to a live legal compliance issue. This suggests that corporate communications review and AI governance practices will see significant growth as companies seek legal clearance for their AI-related marketing claims.
My notes
saved