While moneysupermarket's site used to somewhat disingenuously boast that consumers could "compare over 550 online private medical insurance policies" - when in reality there were only six providers - it has now removed this claim. Likewise, rather than claiming that users can compare 100 car breakdown policies, it now more accurately tells customers that they can compare 50 policies.

Over at Uswitch, our beef has been with their credit card comparison tables, which are labelled "our top deals", but in reality only include the cards that you can apply for through their site (i.e. the ones they have commercial arrangements with). Although they haven't changed the name of the table, they have at least now added a footnote to it, explaining that the cards in the table are the ones that you can apply for on the site. It's certainly a step in the right direction.

I've had long conversations with both uswitch and moneysupermarket over the past few weeks, and I've been impressed that they seem willing to listen to our concerns. And I do sympathise a tiny bit with their predicament.

Ultimately, these sites are commercial entities and need to make a profit. But they make most of their money each time a user clicks through from their site to the site of a financial provider whom they have a commercial agreement with. Not all providers want to play ball, however, so it's all but impossible for them to offer a comparison of the entire market - and if they do, they risk handing business to companies who will not pay them for the favour.

And this is why the industry needs to be regulated. With clear boundaries laid down about how these sites can operate, and clearer incentives to ensure they are both transparent and honest with their users, there will be room for them make a profit without misleading or harming consumers.

There's more that can be done, but it's good to see they're taking some steps in the right direction.