-
Amazon Europe Core Sarl t/a Amazon.co.uk
A webpage on Amazon.co.uk showed unclear options to purchase Amazon Prime and was misleading for consumers.
-
Octopus Energy Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for heat pump installation made unsubstantiated price claims and failed to include material information about a government grant, including eligibility criteria.
-
Origin Sleep UK Ltd t/a Origin Mattress
A website for Origin Mattress made misleading claims about reference prices and associated savings.
-
CityFibre Holdings Ltd
A direct mailing wasn't misleading.
-
Vodafone Ltd
Claims on Vodafone’s website which contained references to reliability and coverage failed to objectively compare one or more material, relevant, verifiable and representative features.
-
Viagogo GmbH
A podcast ad claimed that over half the events listed on Viagogo had tickets selling below face value when this wasn’t the case.
-
Hutchison 3G UK Ltd t/a Three Mobile
A national press ad, two paid-for Meta ads and a website for Three Mobile didn’t make misleading ‘best value’ claims.
-
EE Ltd t/a EE
A TV, radio, paid-for social media and digital poster ad for EE made unsubstantiated claims about the performance and capabilities of a Wi-Fi router.
-
Gemporia Ltd
A teleshopping presentation misleadingly compared the price of a product to the price of a non-identical competitor product and failed to substantiate price statements.
-
DeVosVoorzieningen BVBA t/a Qinux TitanPG
A pre-roll YouTube ad made unsubstantiated claims about the features and popularity of a smart watch.
-
Webloyalty International Ltd t/a Webloyalty, Complete Savings
Two in-app ads and a pop-up banner ad for a shopper reward programme weren't clearly identifiable as ads and didn't make the presentation of choices clear.
-
Webloyalty International Ltd t/a Webloyalty, Complete Savings
Three webpages on a website for a shopper reward programme failed to make clear the steps that people had to take to obtain a 'welcome reward'.
-
British Telecommunications plc t/a BT
A webpage on the BT website didn’t make clear that their broadband contracts would be subject to mid-contract price increases.
-
EE Ltd t/a EE
A webpage on the EE website didn’t make clear that their broadband contracts would be subject to mid-contract price increases.
-
Plusnet plc
A webpage on the Plusnet plc website didn’t make clear that their broadband contracts would be subject to mid-contract price increases.
-
TalkTalk Telecom Ltd t/a TalkTalk
A webpage on the TalkTalk website didn’t make clear that their broadband contracts would be subject to mid-contract price increases.
-
Telefonica UK Ltd t/a O2
A webpage on the O2 website didn’t make clear that their broadband contracts would be subject to mid-contract price increase.
-
Virgin Media Ltd
A webpage on the Virgin Media website didn’t make clear that their broadband contracts would be subject to mid-contract price increases.
-
Sky UK Ltd t/a NOW
A website for Now TV was misleading as it didn’t make it sufficiently clear that free trials, which were automatically added to the basket, would auto-renew at a fee unless cancelled.
-
Vodafone Ltd
A TV ad, paid-for X ad and website for Vodafone made unsubstantiated claims that their broadband services provided a nearly identical performance to BT's services, and that millions of BT broadband customers had already switched, or were actively considering switching, to Vodafone.
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 (20)