-
Babyboo Fashion Pty Ltd t/a Babyboo Fashion
A paid-for Instagram post by an online clothing retailer was banned for being likely to cause serious or widespread offence by objectifying women.
-
Missguided Ltd
An Instagram post by influencer Zara McDermott promoting Missguided products was banned for not being obviously identifiable as an ad.
-
Grey Technology Ltd t/a Gtech
Two newspaper ads and a website ad for a vacuum cleaner were banned for implying the product could completely eliminate dust clouds without holding adequate evidence to prove this.
-
Kendal Nutricare Ltd t/a Kendamil
Two Facebook ads for a formula milk manufacturer were banned for marketing infant formula, which is prohibited under the CAP Code.
-
Vauxhall Motors Ltd
A TV ad for the Vauxhall Corsa was not found to be misleading.
-
Campylite Investments Ltd
A YouTube video and blog post for a building consultant were banned for denigrating one of their competitors by claiming they were scammers.
-
Hutchison 3G UK Ltd t/a 3
A TV, website and paid-for search ad by Three Mobile were banned for not holding adequate substantiation to support the claim that they were the ‘best network for data.”
-
Telefonica UK Ltd t/a O2
A TV and newspaper ad for O2 which claimed it was the “UK’s No.1 Network” was found to be misleading because the comparisons it made with competitors were not clear.
-
Boohoo.com UK Ltd in association with Luke Mabbott
A TikTok post by an influencer promoting the fashion retailer Boohoo breached the CAP Code as it was not obviously identifiable as an ad.
-
HardDisk Direct Ltd
A website ad for an IT hardware retailer was banned for containing misleading scores from a third-party review website.
-
ContextLogic Inc t/a Wish.com
A paid-for ad on Facebook was irresponsible for portraying a model who was under 18 years of age in a sexual manner.
-
Rightmove Group Ltd t/a Rightmove
A TV ad did not depict gender stereotypes in a way that was likely to cause harm.
-
Missguided Ltd
Two posters sold by Missguidied were not found to be offensive or irresponsible.
-
PLR Worldwide Sales Ltd t/a Playrix
Two paid-for Facebook ads for gaming apps were banned for misleadingly representing the games they were purported to feature.
-
Lingscars.com Ltd
A Facebook post advertising a car leasing company was banned for being socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence on the grounds of race.
-
ContextLogic Inc t/a Wish.com
Four in-app ads for the e-commerce platform Wish were banned for placing explicit sexual images in apps that were likely to be used by children.
-
Grapevine Europe Ltd
A TV ad for a car buying comparison site misled consumers about what personal information was needed to obtain valuations from their website.
-
Mizkan Euro Ltd t/a Branston
A poster ad for vinegar did not condone or encourage poor nutritional habits or an unhealthy lifestyle in children.
-
Hey Habito Ltd
A TV and VOD ad for an online mortgage broker featuring cartoon gory horror was scheduled appropriately to prevent it from likely being seen by young children.
-
ITV Broadcasting Ltd
A TV ad for a film was not scheduled inappropriately as children made up only a small proportion of the audience and it was not directed at or likely to be of particular appeal to them.
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 (20)