Rulings (10)
  • Select Specs Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Television, Social media (own site)
    • 12 November 2025

    A TV and YouTube ad for a glasses retailer made misleading and unverifiable price comparisons with competitor products. The ads also made misleading pricing claims, including by failing to make minimum order requirements and non-optional delivery charges sufficiently clear.

  • Banquist Ltd t/a Winedrops

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    Two emails and a paid-for Instagram ad for an online wine retailer made misleading and unsubstantiated claims about the origin of their wine. They also failed to make clear the basis of the price comparisons and the significant conditions of the promotion.

  • Beautaholics Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad and a website page for a hair and skincare retailer which featured an LED facemask made medicinal claims for a product that was not registered with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and didn't have the applicable conformity marking.

  • Cleriva t/a NovaFlow

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    Two paid-for Facebook ads for a sinus clearing device made medical claims for a product that did not have the applicable conformity marking and was not registered with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).

  • Invention Works BV t/a Silk’n

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad and website page for a hair and skincare tool retailer, which featured an LED facemask, made medicinal claims for a product that was not registered with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and did not have the applicable conformity marking.

  • Luyors Retail Inc

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad for a retailer of LED therapy tools, which featured an LED facemask, made medicinal claims for a product that was not registered with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and did not have the applicable conformity marking.

  • On The Beach Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    A TV ad and two website pages for On the Beach misleadingly implied that all consumers with eligible bookings would receive free airport lounge access.

  • Project E Beauty LLC

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad and a website page for a hair and skincare retailer, which featured an LED facemask made medicinal claims for a product that was not registered with the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and did not have the applicable conformity marking.

  • Stove Industry Alliance Ltd t/a Stove Industry Association

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    A website for the Stove Industry Association made unsubstantiated claims that modern stoves emitted significantly lower emissions than open fireplaces or older stoves, and that they were a low-emission way to heat a home. It also failed to make the basis of comparative environmental claims clear. 

  • persons unknown t/a Arthur Mystery Book

    • Upheld
    • 05 November 2025

    An in-game ad for a mobile game app was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence by objectifying and sexualising women and featuring a harmful gender stereotype.