-
Byrokko
A paid for Facebook ad for a tanning accelerator misleadingly and irresponsibly implied that the use of sunbeds was safe, and that using their product during sunbed use could help people achieve a tan quickly and safely.
-
JD Tanning UK Ltd
Two paid-for Meta ads for a sunbed hire company misleadingly and irresponsibly claimed that sunbed use offered health benefits and that the use of sunbeds was safe. The ads also discouraged essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought, including psoriasis.
-
SFJ Group Ltd t/a SunShine Co
A paid-for Google search ad for a tanning studio was socially irresponsible and misleading by suggesting that tanning could be obtained safely.
-
Tanbox Towcester Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for a tanning studio misleadingly and irresponsibly claimed that sunbed use offered health benefits and that the use of sunbeds was healthy. The ad also discouraged essential treatment for conditions for which medical supervision should be sought, including seasonal affective disorder (SAD).
-
The Sun Company (Horsham) Ltd t/a The Sun Company
A paid-for Instagram ad for a tanning studio was socially irresponsible and misleading by suggesting that tanning could be obtained safely.
-
Whiskey & Wealth Club Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad, landing page and website for a whiskey cask investment company made misleading claims about investment returns. The ad also failed to make clear that cask whiskey investments were unregulated and that the value of investments was variable.
-
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.
-
Abellio ScotRail Ltd t/a ScotRail
A website for ScotRail misleadingly claimed that they offered the cheapest ticket prices.
-
Cult Wines Ltd
A website page for a wine investment company made misleading claims about investment returns. The ad also failed to make clear that wine investment was unregulated, that the value of investments was variable and that examples of past performance...
-
GA Trains Limited t/a Greater Anglia
A website page for Greater Anglia misleadingly claimed that they offered the cheapest ticket prices.
-
Howserv Ltd t/a Staysure Travel
A TV ad for a travel insurance company misleadingly claimed that there was no age limit to their service.
-
My Train Ticket Limited t/a mytrainticket.co.uk
A website page for MyTrainTicket misleadingly claimed that they offered the cheapest ticket prices.
-
Real Health Supplements Ltd
A website page for a supplement company made claims that their food supplements could prevent, treat or cure human diseases and conditions.
-
Chequp Health Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for weight-loss medication promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules, and irresponsibly exploited people’s insecurities around body image.
-
Chike Tech Ltd t/a Brainlab
A paid-for Facebook ad for a cognitive test company misleadingly claimed that their product could detect the signs of Alzheimer’s and discouraged essential treatment for a condition for which medical treatment should be sought.
-
MedExpress Enterprises Ltd t/a Bark
A paid-for Instagram ad promoted prescription-only medicines to the public against the law and our rules. The ad also encouraged new mothers to prioritise losing weight by using weight-loss medication which carried safety warnings for people who were breastfeeding, exploited their insecurities about body...
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 (193)