-
Octopus Energy Ltd
Two paid-for social media ads, two website landing pages, a radio ad, a billboard and an email for Octopus Energy didn't include adequate substantiation.
-
2XU UK Limited
A paid-for Instagram ad for 2xu Recovery Compression Tights made medical claims without holding the applicable conformity marking and were not registered with the MHRA.
-
Beautyjenics Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for Beautyjenics, a cosmetic treatment provider, irresponsibly pressured consumers into booking, and trivialised the risks of, “liquid BBLs” (Brazilian Butt Lift) and exploited women’s insecurities surrounding body image.
-
Bomb Doll Aesthetics
A paid-for Facebook ad for Bomb Doll Aesthetics, a Black Friday promotion, irresponsibly pressured consumers into booking, and trivialised the risks of, “liquid BBLs” (Brazilian Butt Lift).
-
CCskinlondondubai
A paid-for Facebook ad for CCskinlondondubai, a cosmetic treatment provider, irresponsibly pressured consumers into booking, and trivialised the risks of, “liquid BBLs” (Brazilian Butt Lift) and exploited women’s insecurities surrounding body image.
-
EME Aesthetics & Beauty Academy Ltd
An Instagram ad for EME Aesthetics, a Black Friday promotion, irresponsibly pressured consumers into booking, and trivialised the risks of, “liquid BBLs” (Brazilian Butt Lift).
-
Global Brands Ltd t/a VK
A paid-for Instagram story posted by @vkdrink was socially irresponsible by implying that drinking alcohol could overcome boredom.
-
NKD Medical Ltd t/a Dr Ducu London
A paid-for Instagram ad for Dr. Ducu, a cosmetic treatment provider, irresponsibly pressured consumers into booking, and trivialised the risks of, “liquid BBLs” (Brazilian Butt Lift).
-
Rejuvenate Academy Ltd t/a Rejuvenate Clinics
A paid-for Facebook ad for Rejuvenate Clinics, a cosmetic treatment provider, irresponsibly pressured consumers into booking, and trivialised the risks of, “liquid BBLs” (Brazilian Butt Lift).
-
Person(s) Unknown t/a Henry’s Boots
A paid-for Facebook ad and website made misleading claims including that their products were handmade and that they were closing down and also failed to include the geographical address from which they operated.
-
Person(s) unknown t/a Rosely London
A paid-for Facebook ad and website made misleading claims including about the materials used to make products and money-back guarantees and also failed to include the geographical address from which they operated.
-
Person(s) unknown t/a Luxelle-London
Two paid-for Facebook ads and a website misleadingly implied they were a UK-based company and failed to include the geographical address from which they operated.
-
TotalEnergies SE
A paid-for X ad for TotalEnergies omitted material information about the proportion of their overall business activities that comprised lower-carbon activities.
-
Hutchison 3G UK Ltd t/a Three Mobile
A national press ad, two paid-for Meta ads and a website for Three Mobile didn’t make misleading ‘best value’ claims.
-
A3 Games Pte Ltd t/a Top Girl
A paid-for Facebook ad was socially irresponsible and caused serious or widespread offence, including by featuring a harmful gender stereotype by objectifying and sexualising women.
-
EE Ltd t/a EE
A TV, radio, paid-for social media and digital poster ad for EE made unsubstantiated claims about the performance and capabilities of a Wi-Fi router.
-
Bestway Retail Ltd t/a Bargain Booze
A paid-for Instagram and Facebook ad for alcohol which featured Father Christmas was of particular appeal to under-18s.
-
Haven Leisure Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad and website made misleading price claims.
-
Intelligent Lending Ltd t/a Ocean Finance
A paid-for Meta ad and display ad irresponsibly encouraged consumers to spend regularly on non-essential purchases using a credit card.
-
Connect UK Sales Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad and website landing page didn’t make clear that the value of investments was variable and failed to provide evidence to substantiate investment claims and price comparisons.
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 (85)