Rulings (77)
  • PEL Consultancy Services Ltd t/a PEL Investigations

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 11 May 2022

    We banned an ad for a private investigation agency for having unsubstantiated claims.

  • Adidas UK Ltd t/a Adidas

    • Upheld
    • Poster, Social media (own site)
    • 11 May 2022

    We upheld complaints against ads containing nudity.

  • Paramount UK Partnership t/a Comedy Central, Paramount Comedy Channel

    • Upheld
    • Internet (video)
    • 29 June 2022

    A pre-roll ad on YouTube for a Comedy Central programme was likely to cause serious offence and was irresponsibly targeted.

  • WaterWipes UC

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 29 June 2022

    A paid-for Facebook ad for wipes was banned because ‘world’s purest wipes’ was found to be a misleading and unverifiable claim.

  • Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 22 June 2022

    We upheld complaints about an online product listing for a pair of jeans, as it objectified women.

  • Capri Sun GmbH

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    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

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A website for a train company made misleading claims that its ticket prices could not be beaten.

  • IMC Toys UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience, young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.

  • IMC Toys UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience, young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.

  • PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power

    • Not upheld
    • Radio
    • 15 June 2022

    A radio ad for a bookmaker did not break the rules on harm and offence on the grounds of innuendo or portrayal of gender stereotypes

  • PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power

    • Not upheld
    • Radio
    • 15 June 2022

    A radio ad for a bookmaker did not break rules on harm and offence with regards to references to emigration and sporting rivalries.

  • U K Insurance Ltd t/a Churchill

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience - young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.

  • Sky UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Poster, Television
    • 08 June 2022

    A TV and a poster ad for Sky Mobile was likely to mislead because Sky UK Ltd did not provide objective comparative evidence to substantiate its claim that it was the perfect network.

  • Tesco Stores Ltd t/a Tesco

    • Upheld
    • Television, Newspaper, VOD, Radio
    • 08 June 2022

    A cross-media ad (TV, radio, Twitter, press, VOD, website) by Tesco made misleading claims that Plant Chef products could make a positive environmental difference to the planet compared to their meat equivalents.

  • AJ Bell

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 01 June 2022

    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

  • Ayoomi Technology Co Ltd

    • Upheld
    • App (paid ad)
    • 01 June 2022

    An in-game ad was socially irresponsible and likely to cause serious or widespread offence for objectifying women or presenting them as stereotyped sexual objects and featuring implied non-consensual sexual acts. 

  • Verisure Services (UK) Ltd t/a Verisure

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 01 June 2022

    Claims on a website by a provider of security alarms that it offered the best alarm technology on the market were misleading and were not verifiable. 

  • Stacey Bradley

    • Upheld
    • Newspaper
    • 25 May 2022

    Two local press ads, one print and one digital, misleadingly implied they had been placed, endorsed or approved by a public body and misleadingly implied COVID-19 vaccinations were unsafe and illegal. They were socially irresponsible and caused fear without justifiable reason.

  • Stephen Bear t/a Pink Panther Models

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 25 May 2022

    A website for an adult webcam modelling recruitment agency made misleading earnings claims and inaccurate statement about the organisation’s experience in the sector.

  • Alibaba Group Holding Limited t/a Alibaba

    • Upheld
    • Website (paid ad)
    • 18 May 2022

    A website ad for an online retailer was irresponsible for portraying a female model who was under the age of 18 in a sexual way.