-
Town Force Ltd
A website ad for a plumbing service was banned for misleadingly stating that they did not charge a call-out fee when it was their policy to do so.
-
Technical Specialities Ltd t/a Lakeland Paints
A website ad for a paint product was banned for making misleading claims about its effectiveness in absorbing air pollutants.
-
Everest Ltd
A website ad for new household windows and doors was banned for making misleading savings claims.
-
Harvey Water Softeners Ltd
A leaflet for a water softener misleadingly claimed that the product produced glossier hair and softer skin.
-
Procter & Gamble UK
A website and an internet display ad for dishwasher tablets did not make misleading “best on test” claims but the display ad broke the rules on comparisons with identifiable competitors.
-
Vax Ltd
A newspaper ad for a vacuum cleaner claiming to be better than the UK’s top 10 bestselling cordless vacuums did not mislead.
-
Wickes Building Supplies Ltd t/a Wickes Building Supplies Ltd
A TV ad for Wickes’ free design service was not misleading.
-
Slip Enterprises Pty Ltd t/a Slipsilk
Claims on a website for a company selling silk pillowcases were not misleading.
-
Ecocamel Ltd
A national press and magazine ad for a water descaler made misleading claims about the removal and formation of limescale, that it could reduce energy bills and ease dry skin conditions.
-
HouseSimple Ltd
Claims on a website for an estate agent did not break the misleadingness rules.
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 (10)