-
Capri Sun GmbH
A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience, young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.
-
First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Ltd t/a Avanti West Coast
A website for a train company made misleading claims that its ticket prices could not be beaten.
-
Ten Percent Music Elite Group Ltd t/a TPM the Label
An Instagram post promoting a prize draw did not award prizes as described and was not administered fairly.
-
Trailfinders Ltd
A holiday brochure was misleading because it did not make it sufficiently clear that special offers on free nights and free room upgrades were subject to restrictions.
-
AJ Bell
A TV ad for investment products was not socially irresponsible as it highlighted the risks of investing and made clear that investors were not guaranteed to make profits
-
Bier Nuts Ltd t/a Bier Company
An email and a text message for a mail order beer subscription service misled consumers by falsely claiming or implying they had won a prize of “free beer for life”.
-
Barton Park Estates Ltd t/a Devon Oaks Park; Seascapes
An ad for luxury park homes was banned for being misleading.
-
Lamb & Co. Property Ltd
An outdoor poster for an estate agents was banned for being likely to cause offence.
-
Mondelez UK Ltd
A website ad for a Cadburys promotion was banned for omitting significant terms and conditions.
-
Stillbloom Ltd
An ad for lead generation service CleverKeith has been banned for misleading advertising.
-
Bighams Ltd
A product packaging ad promoting a competition to win a campervan broke the CAP Code as the promotion was not administered fairly.
-
Chinnock Housing Ltd
A direct mailing for a property company was banned for not being obviously identifiable as an ad.
-
Currys Group Ltd
A pre-roll YouTube ad for Currys which showed people riding e-scooters was banned for irresponsibly suggesting that electric scooters could be used in public places in the UK.
-
Stephen Bear t/a stevie bear
A tweet by Stephen Bear about a promotion broke the CAP Code as the promotion was not administered fairly.
-
In The Style Fashion Ltd t/a In the Style
Two Instagram Stories and a website ad for an online clothing brand were banned for making misleading price claims.
-
Emma Matratzen GmbH t/a Emma Mattress
A website and poster ad for mattresses were banned for making misleading savings claims.
-
Mondelez UK Ltd t/a Cadbury
A promotion for a Cadbury competition breached the CAP Code because they were unable to provide the full names of the judges on request.
-
Ziglu Ltd
A digital poster for Ziglu, an online cryptocurrency platform, was banned because it took advantage of consumers’ inexperience and because it was likely to cause unjustifiable distress.
-
Floki Inu
A poster for Floki Inu, a cryptocurrency, was banned for trivialising investment in cryptocurrency and for taking advantage of consumers’ lack of experience or credulity.
-
Witcombe Festival
An Instagram post by the Witcombe Festival for a promotion to win tickets to the festival was banned because the promotion was not administered fairly.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following 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, following receipt of a complaint, agreed to amend or withdraw their ad without the need for a formal investigation.
Rulings (63)