-
Amazing Giveaways Ltd
A Facebook post for a prize draw wasn't administered fairly and caused unnecessary disappointment.
-
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.
-
Wowcher Ltd
A website failed to administer a promotion fairly and caused unnecessary disappointment.
-
Groupe SEB UK Ltd t/a Tefal
A website product page for a set of pans misleadingly implied that a discount offer could be used for particular products when that was not the case.
-
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.
-
Shop TJC Ltd t/a Ideal World
A teleshopping presentation made unsubstantiated price and savings claims.
-
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.
-
Meggan Kirkland
A promotion on Meggan Kirkland’s Instagram account wasn’t administered fairly.
-
Beer52 Ltd
Two email promotions omitted significant conditions.
-
Origin Sleep UK Ltd t/a Origin Mattress
A website implied that a promotion was time limited when this wasn’t the case, made misleading and unsubstantiated savings claims and made unsubstantiated claims about the health properties of their products.
-
Churchill Retirement Living Ltd
A national newspaper ad failed to include the significant conditions of a promotion, including a closing date.
-
Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd
A website promotion misleadingly described a promotional item as “free”, did not make clear promotional items would have to be purchased upfront before being redeemed via a cashback mechanism and omitted significant conditions.
-
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'.
-
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.
-
Sports Supplements Ltd t/a Bulk
An email contained a promotion which wasn't capable of being used and so wasn't administered fairly.
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 (18)