-
Luma Pet
A paid-for Facebook ad for Luma Pet misleadingly claimed that a red light therapy pad could reduce inflammation around the spinal discs, treat existing spinal damages or back pain and prevent IVDD related flare ups without having the evidence to support these claims.
-
ESTHETURK Danismanlik A.S. t/a You Clinic
A paid-for Meta ad and a paid-for Google ad for a medical clinic made misleading claims that stem cell treatment could treat or alleviate the traits associated with autism or stop the progression of autism.
-
Here We Flo Ltd t/a Flo
Three Instagram posts for a period product company made misleading environmental claims, including by failing to make the basis of environmental claims clear.
-
International Medical Center LLC t/a Swiss Medica
A paid-for Meta ad for a medical clinic made misleading claims that stem cell treatment could treat or alleviate the traits associated with autism.
-
Linden Clinics t/a Linden Stem Cell
A paid-for Facebook ad for a stem cell therapy clinic made misleading claims that stem cell therapy was effective in improving the traits associated with autism in children.
-
Reliable Medicare Ltd
Three product listings on the website of a medical aesthetics and skincare supplier made misleading savings claims.
-
Rumi Pulse t/a Rumi Pulse Medical Tourism Agency
A paid-for Meta ad for a medical clinic made misleading claims that stem cell treatment could treat or alleviate the traits associated with autism.
-
Frasers Group Trading Ltd t/a Sports Direct
A product page on the Sports Direct website made misleading claims about reference price and associated savings.
-
SheMed Ltd
A paid-for Reddit ad for a female-focused medical weight-loss service promoted weight-loss prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules, was likely to exploit consumers’ insecurities relating to body image and weight and was irresponsible.
-
Gary Baron
A webpage for Gary Baron Counselling claimed that he was a member of the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) when this wasn’t the case.
-
BoyleSports (Gibraltar) Ltd t/a BoyleSports
A paid-for online display ad for a gambling company encouraged gambling behaviour that was socially irresponsible and could lead to financial harm by encouraging frequent and repetitive participation.
-
Dignity Funerals Ltd t/a Simplicity Cremations
Two TV ads for a funeral provider didn’t make clear that the funeral plans advertised were for non-attended cremations only.
-
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.
-
Origin Sleep UK Ltd t/a Origin Mattress
A website for a mattress company made misleading savings claims and misleadingly implied that discount offers were time-limited and that people needed to act more quickly than necessary to take advantage of an offer.
-
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.
-
Adidas UK Ltd t/a adidas
A paid-for Google ad for adidas made misleading environmental claims.
-
Big Fang Collective Ltd t/a Golf Fang
A leaflet for an indoor golf venue didn’t make clear it was an ad and caused unjustified distress by resembling a parking ticket.
-
Calvin Klein Europe BV t/a Calvin Klein
A paid-for Google ad for Calvin Klein made misleading environmental claims.
-
Uniqlo (UK) Ltd t/a UNIQLO
A paid- for Google ad for UNIQLO made misleading environmental claims.
-
BetterYou Ltd t/a Better You
A magazine ad for a supplement company made misleading claims that their product delivered vitamin D “quickly” and enabled fast absorption of vitamin D into the body.
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 (63)