-
Adamans Group Ltd
A website page for a jeweller misleadingly gave the impression that products were included in a promotional offer and failed to make clear which products were included in the offer.
-
Dean Harrison
Three paid-for Google search listings and three websites for an accident claims management company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business by implying they were a car insurance provider and didn’t make their commercial intent clear.
-
Freedom Debt Ltd
Two paid-for Google search listings and two websites for an accident claims management company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business by implying they were a car insurance provider and didn’t make their commercial intent clear.
-
Person(s) unknown
A paid-for Google search ad and a website landing page for an accident management company falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their business by implying they were a car insurance provider and didn’t make their commercial intent clear.
-
Vodafone Ltd
Six ads for Vodafone were misleading by making an implied comparative claim without objectively comparing one or more specific verifiable features.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following a formal investigation, the advertising rules apply and where we draw the line in judging whether an ad has broken the rules. We also publish a list of companies and organisations which agree to amend or withdraw their ad without being subject to a formal ruling.
Rulings (5)