-
Care Pharma Bradford Ltd t/a The Care Pharmacy
A paid-for Google search ad for an online pharmacy promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
Express Healthcare Ltd t/a pharmacyonline
Two paid-for Meta ads and a website for an online pharmacy made medicinal claims and promoted unlicensed products. They also promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
Juniper Technologies UK Ltd
A paid-for Google ad for an online pharmacy promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
MedExpress Enterprises Ltd t/a MedExpress
A paid-for Facebook ad for MedExpress promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
Simple Online Healthcare Ltd t/a Simple Online Pharmacy
Two paid-for social media ads for an online pharmacy made medicinal claims and promoted unlicensed products. They also promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
Hemios
A paid-for Facebook ad and a paid-for YouTube display ad for a magnetic bracelet made misleading claims in relation to weight-loss and improving erectile performance.
-
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.
-
The Monty Bojangles Co Ltd
A paid-for Instagram ad for Monty Bojangles didn’t break the less healthy food rules because it was a small and medium-sized enterprise and was therefore exempt.
-
Bolt Healthcare Ltd t/a Bolt Pharmacy
Two paid-for Facebook ads for an online pharmacy failed to make their commercial intent clear and falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their trade by presenting websites used for advertising purposes as independent review sites. They also promoted weight loss prescription-only ...
-
Bolt Healthcare Ltd t/a Bolt Pharmacy
Two paid-for Facebook ads for an online pharmacy promoted weight loss prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
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.
-
Kind Patches Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for a supplement company made claims that a supplement patch could help with weight-loss and made medicinal claims for products that weren’t authorised by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The ad was also socially irresponsible and incl...
-
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.
-
Phlo Technologies Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad promoted weight-loss prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.
-
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.
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 (54)