-
Parker Products Ltd t/a ParkerBrand
A website ad for a pressure washer made misleading savings claims and stated savings against previous prices without evidence that the product was normally sold at that price.
-
Cablelinker Electronics Ltd t/a Aquoxis
A YouTube pre-roll ad and two online display ads for a pressure washer misleadingly exaggerated the functionality of the product.
-
Take-Two Interactive Software Inc t/a Take Two Interactive
An ad for the video game Borderlands 4 seen on a bus, didn’t omit material information.
-
Videoslots Ltd t/a Mr Vegas
A paid-for Facebook ad for a gambling company featured imagery that was likely to be of strong appeal to under-18s.
-
YN Netcom Ltd t/a BeeHome
A paid-for Facebook ad for a cordless pressure washer misleadingly exaggerated the functionality of the product and claimed they had a high rating based on customer reviews when this was not the case.
-
Argos Limited t/a Argos
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.
-
Revolut Ltd
A webpage on Revolut’s website wasn’t misleading.
-
Dribble Media Ltd t/a Midnite
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.
-
Dollead Technology Ltd
A paid-for search ad for a vacuum review website failed to make their commercial intent clear and falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their trade by presenting websites used for marketing purposes as independent review sites.
-
Easy as HGV Ltd
Three websites for Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) training service providers made misleading claims about HGV test pass rates and falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their business.
-
HGV Learning
A website for a Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) training service provider made misleading claims about HGV test pass rates.
-
HGVT Ltd
A website and pages for Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) training service providers made misleading claims about HGV test pass rates, the nature of a promotion and being the largest and best rated HGV training provider. The ad also falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their business.
-
Sinointeractive Digital Marketing Co Ltd t/a trustedbuyerguide.org
A paid-for search ad for a vacuum review website failed to make their commercial intent clear and falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their trade by presenting websites used for marketing purposes as independent review sites.
-
Xinyu International Trading Ltd t/a consumertestreports.org
A paid-for search ad for a vacuum review website failed to make their commercial intent clear and falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their trade by presenting websites used for marketing purposes as independent review sites.
-
Skill on Net Ltd t/a Gecko Play
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
[Republished ruling] A YouTube ad for Match Bingo, which featured the Tottenham Hotspur Football team, wasn’t inappropriately targeted to under-18s.
-
Ecom7 Ltd t/a BrizaAC
A paid-for online display ad for a mini-cooler misleadingly exaggerated the effectiveness of a product.
-
HydroChill
A paid-for YouTube ad for a mini-cooler made exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims about their product’s cooling abilities, cost effectiveness and that their product was a viable and economical alternative to air conditioning.
-
UAB CommerceCore t/a NuraBreeze
A paid-for YouTube ad for a mini-cooler made exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims about their product’s cooling abilities, cost effectiveness and that their product was a viable and economical alternative to air conditioning.
-
UAB Rara Digital t/a Airabreeze
Two paid-for online display ads and a paid-for YouTube ad for a mini-cooler made exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims about their product’s cooling abilities, cost effectiveness and that their product was a viable and economical alternative to air conditioning.
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)