Rulings (22)
  • Recro Ltd t/a Casumo

    • Upheld
    • Internet (display)
    • 11 November 2026

    A paid-for online display ad for a gambling website encouraged socially irresponsible behaviour that could lead to financial harm.

  • Optival Ltd t/a bestbookiesandbettingsites.co.uk

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 28 October 2026

    A paid-for search ad for a betting website was irresponsibly targeted.

  • HRY Games t/a AI Scorecast

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 14 October 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a data analytics app for football results was socially irresponsible and misleading by implying that people who used the service to make ‘informed’ gambling decisions would be very likely to turn a profit. 

  • Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 16 September 2026

    A paid-for TikTok ad for Midnite featured someone who was or seemed to be under 25 gambling and playing a significant role in the ad.

  • White Hat Gaming Ltd t/a Casimba and The Grand Ivy Casino

    • Not upheld
    • Internet (display)
    • 16 September 2026

    Two web display ads for gambling sites and a website weren’t directed at under-18s. 

  • Smart Gravity Ltd t/a top10onlinecasinoreviews.co.uk

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 09 September 2026

    A paid-for search ad for a gambling comparison website was not targeted responsibly.

  • The Boots Company PLC t/a Boots

    • Upheld
    • National newspaper (paid ad)
    • 19 August 2026

    A national press ad for Boots featured a promotion that wasn’t administered fairly and caused participants unnecessary disappointment.

  • Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite

    • Upheld
    • 12 August 2026

    Two TV ads, Two Video on Demand ads and a radio ad for Midnite, a betting app, portrayed gambling behaviour that could lead to financial, social or emotional harm and also suggested that gambling was an escape from personal problems.

  • Videoslots Ltd t/a Mr Vegas

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 01 July 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a gambling company featured imagery that was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • Argos Limited t/a Argos

    • Upheld in part
    • Magazine (commercial classified)
    • 24 June 2026

    A page in the Argos 2025 Christmas gift guide featuring the video game Call of Duty: Black Ops 7 failed to make clear that the game contained loot boxes. Another ad was investigated but it didn’t break the rules. 

  • Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 10 June 2026

    A TikTok post on Mia Mon’s account promoting an online betting platform didn’t feature someone who was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.

  • DBZ Marketplace Online Ltd t/a Debenhams

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 20 May 2026

    Two video display banners for Debenhams made misleading savings claims.

  • John Lewis plc

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 20 May 2026

    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

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 20 May 2026

    Two website pages for Very made misleading savings claims. 

  • Bakkavor Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Packaging (promotion)
    • 29 April 2026

    A promotion featured on the packaging of a cookie dough dessert misleadingly implied that particular products were included in the promotion, causing unnecessary disappointment.

  • Skill on Net Ltd t/a Gecko Play

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 08 April 2026

    A paid-for Instagram ad for a gambling website portrayed, condoned and encouraged gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible and could lead to financial, social or emotional harm.

  • RTSB Ltd t/a Match Bingo

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 04 March 2026

    [Republished ruling] A YouTube ad for Match Bingo, which featured the Tottenham Hotspur Football team, wasn’t inappropriately targeted to under-18s.

  • Whaleco UK Ltd t/a Temu

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 18 February 2026

    Two paid-for Facebook ads for Temu were misleading by contradicting the terms and conditions that applied to an advertised promotion.

  • OTTY Sleep Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 17 December 2025

    A website page for a mattress company made misleading savings claims.

  • AGN Events t/a Rock N Roll Circus

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 26 November 2025

    An Instagram post by Rock N Roll Circus failed to include all the significant conditions of a promotion.