Rulings (41)
  • Sweet Bee Organics Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 29 October 2025

    A website for a beauty products retailer made medicinal claims about an unlicensed product.

  • HW Fantasy Ltd t/a My Passion

    • Upheld
    • In-game (apps)
    • 15 October 2025

    An in-game ad for an online romantic novel service, seen in a puzzle game was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious and widespread offence, including by trivialising violence against women.

  • Hammonds Furniture Ltd t/a Hammonds

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 08 October 2025

    A banner ad and a page on the Hammonds Furniture website, misleadingly implied that discount offers were time limited and also made unsubstantiated and unverifiable comparative claims with identifiable competitors.

  • BCCR Ltd t/a Belief Coding Cognitive Rewiring

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 01 October 2025

    Two posts on Jessica Cunningham’s Facebook page advertising belief coding discouraged essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought and made unsubstantiated claims for the efficacy of belief coding in treating health conditions.

  • 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.

  • JLG Legal Ltd t/a Johnson Law Group

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid), 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...

  • Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 17 September 2025

    A post on Midnite’s X page featuring an AI generated video depicting footballer Trent Alexander-Arnold had strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Menwell Ltd t/a Voy

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 17 September 2025

    A paid-for Google ad for weight-loss treatments promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.

  • SJC&M Ltd t/a Scar Erase

    • Upheld in part
    • Internet (classified)
    • 17 September 2025

    A product listing on Amazon for scar treatments made unsubstantiated efficacy claims about the treatment period and exaggerated the products efficacy in before and after photos. We also investigated whether the ad made medical claims that broke the rules but we didn’t find it to be in breach.

  • Dr Vegan Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 10 September 2025

    An Instagram post for Dr Vegan Ltd claimed that a food supplement could prevent, treat or cure symptoms of the menopause and made medicinal claims for products that weren’t authorised by the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency.

  • Heineken UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 10 September 2025

    An Instagram post by the comedian Al Nash advertising Strongbow, implied that alcohol was indispensable and took priority in life.

  • Mast-Jagermeister UK t/a Jägermeister

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

    Two paid-for Facebook and Instagram ads for Jägermeister were socially irresponsible and implied that alcohol was a key component of the success of a social event.

  • Domino's Pizza UK & Ireland Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 27 August 2025

    A paid-for YouTube ad for a HFSS product wasn’t appropriately targeted and appeared in media that was likely to appeal to under-16s.

  • Locksley Distilling Co Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 27 August 2025

    A paid-for Facebook and Instagram ad for a bottle of gin implied that a drink may be preferred because of its higher alcohol content.

  • SP Graham Retail Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Circular
    • 27 August 2025

    A voucher for Sean Graham bookmakers didn’t include all the significant conditions of the promotion and also failed to administer the promotion fairly.

  • Amazing Giveaways Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 13 August 2025

    A Facebook post for a prize draw wasn't administered fairly and caused unnecessary disappointment.

  • Evolution Slimming Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 06 August 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad for food supplements made unauthorised and misleading medical and health claims for weight loss.

  • Hollywoodbets International UK Ltd t/a Hollywoodbets

    • Upheld
    • Website (paid ad)
    • 23 July 2025

    A banner ad for Hollywood bets seen on the Virtual Football League website was inappropriately targeted to under-18s.