-
Jap Car South Ltd
A website for a car import company was likely to cause serious offence on the grounds of race.
-
Lotus Leisure Ltd t/a DialAFlight
A paid-for Meta ad for a travel agent didn’t make the basis for their environmental claims clear.
-
Thomas Cook Tourism (UK) Company Ltd t/a Thomas Cook
A paid- for Google ad for Thomas Cook didn’t make the basis for their environmental claims clear.
-
We Love Holidays Ltd t/a loveholidays
Two paid-for Google ads for loveholidays didn’t make the basis for their environmental claims clear.
-
The Boots Company PLC t/a Boots
A national press ad for Boots featured a promotion that wasn’t administered fairly and caused participants unnecessary disappointment.
-
Eurowings GmbH t/a Eurowings
A paid-for Google ad for an airline gave a misleading impression of their flights environmental impact and implied that people could pay to fully offset the carbon emissions from a specific flight without suitable evidence to support these claims.
-
Qatar Airways Group QCSC t/a Qatar Airways
Two paid-for LinkedIn posts for an airline gave a misleading impression of their flights environmental impact and implied that people could pay to fully offset the carbon emissions of a specific flight without suitable evidence to support this claim.
-
Wowcher Ltd t/a Wowcher
A promotion on the Wowcher website wasn’t administered fairly and caused unnecessary disappointment.
-
DBZ Marketplace Online Ltd t/a Debenhams
Two video display banners for Debenhams made misleading savings claims.
-
John Lewis plc
A paid-for Facebook ad and an online display ad for John Lewis made misleading savings claims.
-
Shop Direct Home Shopping Ltd t/a Very
Two website pages for Very made misleading savings claims.
-
Bakkavor Ltd
A promotion featured on the packaging of a cookie dough dessert misleadingly implied that particular products were included in the promotion, causing unnecessary disappointment.
-
CC Response NW Ltd
Two paid-for Google search listings and a web landing page for an accident claims management company failed to make the nature of their service clear, misleadingly implied there was no cost to consumers and made misleading claims in relation to potential savings.
-
iRevolution Claims Ltd
Three Google search listings and a website for an accident claims management company failed to make the nature of their service clear and misleadingly implied there was no cost to consumers.
-
Whaleco UK Ltd t/a Temu
Two paid-for Facebook ads for Temu were misleading by contradicting the terms and conditions that applied to an advertised promotion.
-
Abellio ScotRail Ltd t/a ScotRail
A website for ScotRail misleadingly claimed that they offered the cheapest ticket prices.
-
GA Trains Limited t/a Greater Anglia
A website page for Greater Anglia misleadingly claimed that they offered the cheapest ticket prices.
-
Howserv Ltd t/a Staysure Travel
A TV ad for a travel insurance company misleadingly claimed that there was no age limit to their service.
-
My Train Ticket Limited t/a mytrainticket.co.uk
A website page for MyTrainTicket misleadingly claimed that they offered the cheapest ticket prices.
-
OTTY Sleep Ltd
A website page for a mattress company made misleading savings claims.
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 (30)