-
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.
-
AGN Events t/a Rock N Roll Circus
An Instagram post by Rock N Roll Circus failed to include all the significant conditions of a promotion.
-
FlixBus UK Ltd
A website for FlixBus UK made misleading claims about the price of coach tickets.
-
Storage Giant Ltd
Two web pages and an email for a self-storage company made best price guaranteed claims without evidence to support them. They also failed to make sure that quoted prices reflected the total cost people would pay and didn’t make clear when prices were promotional or subject to significant...
-
Trip.com Travel Singapore Pte. Ltd t/a Trip.com
Two paid-for Meta ads for Trip.com for a promotion caused unnecessary disappointment and didn’t provide people with sufficient information to make an informed decision on whether or not to participate. One of the ads also misleadingly implied that an offer was available during a part...
-
Booking.com BV
A paid-for search ad for Booking.com made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.
-
Butlins Skyline Ltd t/a Butlins
An email promotion for Butlins wasn’t administered fairly because the closing date of the promotion was changed
-
Hilton Worldwide Ltd
Two paid-for search ads for Hilton made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.
-
Travelodge Hotels Ltd
Two paid-for search ads for Travelodge made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.
-
Banquist Ltd t/a Winedrops
Two emails and a paid-for Instagram ad for an online wine retailer made misleading and unsubstantiated claims about the origin of their wine. They also failed to make clear the basis of the price comparisons and the significant conditions of the promotion.
-
On The Beach Ltd
A TV ad and two website pages for On the Beach misleadingly implied that all consumers with eligible bookings would receive free airport lounge access.
-
Currys Group Ltd t/a Currys
A paid-for Facebook ad for Currys was misleading and socially irresponsible by implying that e-scooters could be ridden on public roads.
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 (29)