-
AGN Events t/a Rock N Roll Circus
An Instagram post by Rock N Roll Circus failed to include all the significant conditions of a promotion.
-
Domestika Inc
A paid-for Facebook post for an online course provider misleadingly gave the impression that an offer was a one-off purchase when it was only available when signing up to a free trial of a subscription.
-
Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite
A post on Midnite’s X page featured a person who was likely to have strong appeal to under-18s.
-
Ecom7 Ltd t/a BrizaAC
A paid-for online display ad for a mini-cooler misleadingly exaggerated the effectiveness of a product.
-
FlixBus UK Ltd
A website for FlixBus UK made misleading claims about the price of coach tickets.
-
Good Energy Ltd
A paid-for Meta ad for Good Energy made unsubstantiated savings claims about greener home installation and failed to include all material information.
-
HydroChill
A paid-for YouTube ad for a mini-cooler made exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims about their product’s cooling abilities, cost effectiveness and that their product was a viable and economical alternative to air conditioning.
-
Storage Giant Ltd
Two web pages and an email for a self-storage company made best price guaranteed claims without evidence to support them. They also failed to make sure that quoted prices reflected the total cost people would pay and didn’t make clear when prices were promotional or subject to significant...
-
Trip.com Travel Singapore Pte. Ltd t/a Trip.com
Two paid-for Meta ads for Trip.com for a promotion caused unnecessary disappointment and didn’t provide people with sufficient information to make an informed decision on whether or not to participate. One of the ads also misleadingly implied that an offer was available during a part...
-
UAB CommerceCore t/a NuraBreeze
A paid-for YouTube ad for a mini-cooler made exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims about their product’s cooling abilities, cost effectiveness and that their product was a viable and economical alternative to air conditioning.
-
UAB Rara Digital t/a Airabreeze
Two paid-for online display ads and a paid-for YouTube ad for a mini-cooler made exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims about their product’s cooling abilities, cost effectiveness and that their product was a viable and economical alternative to air conditioning.
-
Accor (UK) Ltd
A paid-for website ad for Accor made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms. A second paid-for website ad was also investigated but didn’t break the rules.
-
Booking.com BV
A paid-for search ad for Booking.com made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.
-
Hilton Worldwide Ltd
Two paid-for search ads for Hilton made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.
-
Hutch Games Ltd t/a F1 Clash
An app store listing and in-game storefront for the mobile game ‘F1 Clash’ failed to make clear that it contained loot boxes and misleadingly implied that people had an equal chance of winning different prizes. A third issue was investigated but didn’t break the rules.
-
Kabam Games Inc
An app store listing for the ‘Marvel Contest of Champions’ game failed to make clear that it contained loot boxes.
-
Nexters Global Ltd
An app store listing for the ‘Hero Wars: Alliance RPG’ game failed to make clear that it contained loot boxes.
-
Travelodge Hotels Ltd
Two paid-for search ads for Travelodge made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.
-
Select Specs Ltd
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
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.
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 (258)