Rulings (8)
  • Au Vodka Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 24 September 2025

    A TikTok post by influencer Lucinda Strafford, a paid-for Facebook post featuring influencer Kai Cenat and another paid-for Facebook post advertising AU Vodka were inappropriately targeted, directed at under-18s and featured people who were, or appeared to be, under-25.

  • Currys Group Ltd t/a Currys

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 24 September 2025

    A paid-for Facebook ad for Currys was misleading and socially irresponsible by implying that e-scooters could be ridden on public roads.

  • JLG Legal Ltd t/a Johnson Law Group

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 24 September 2025

    A Google paid-for search ad, a paid-for Facebook ad and website for Johnson Law Group, relating to group action compensation claims by diesel vehicle owners and lessees, failed to make clear that by providing their details and e-signing, people were signing a legally binding contract to join a group action claim, omitt...

  • Jones Whyte Law Ltd t/a Jones Whyte

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 24 September 2025

    A website and paid-for Facebook ad for James Whyte, relating to group action compensation claims for people who had been affected by a data breach, failed to present material information clearly and also omitted material information.

  • KP Law Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 24 September 2025

    A website and a paid-for Facebook ad for Join the Claim, relating to group action compensation claims by people who had been affected by a data breach, falsely implied that the advertiser was acting for purposes outside its business, didn’t make their commercial intent clear, didn’t present material informa...

  • Marble Muse

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 24 September 2025

    A website for a clothing company misleadingly implied that they were UK based and omitted the identity and geographical address of the company.

  • Voodoo Doll Ltd t/a MOJO Manchester

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 24 September 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad for a bar, which referenced alcoholic drinks, was irresponsible by being likely to have particular appeal to under-18s and by encouraging excessive drinking.

  • William Hill Organization Ltd t/a William Hill

    • Upheld
    • Point of sale
    • 24 September 2025

    A promotional voucher for William Hill encouraged irresponsible use.

Informally resolved (13)
  • Boots Opticians Professional Services Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Collider Brew Co Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Currys Group Ltd t/a Currys

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Home Grant Check Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Life Environmental Services Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Med-Fit UK Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Nordic Visitor

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Omni Pet Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • P Louise Makeup Academy Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Paul Wayne Gregory Chocolates Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Pernod Ricard UK Ltd t/a Jamesons

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Renault UK Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Uber Eats UK Ltd

    • 24 September 2025
    • Number of complaints: 1