-
Contact Solar Ltd
A paid-for Bing search ad for a solar panel installation company made unsubstantiated price claims and omitted material information that was likely to affect consumers’ understanding of the price claim.
-
uSwitch Ltd
A marketing email did not mislead consumers about an exclusive offer to switch gas suppliers.
-
Aira Home UK Ltd
A paid-for Meta ad for heat pump installation omitted material information about the eligibility criteria for government funding available for installing the pumps.
-
EDF Energy Ltd t/a EDF
A paid-for Google ad for heat pump installation omitted material information about the eligibility criteria for government funding available for installing the pumps.
-
Energystore Ltd
A local press ad for a loft and wall cavity insulation installation company was misleading because it omitted material information about the government funding available for installing insulation products.
-
Ovo Energy Ltd
A paid-for Meta ad for insulation installation did not make misleading price claims and included material information about a government grant, including eligibility criteria.
-
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.
-
Aramco Overseas Oil Company BV t/a Aramco
Paid-for LinkedIn, Google and Instagram ads featuring a Formula 1 car did not make misleading environmental claims.
-
EE Ltd t/a EE
A website failed to directly qualify 'unlimited' claims.
-
Vodafone Ltd t/a vodafone
A website made misleading savings claims and implied that a promotional price was time-limited when this wasn't the case.
-
Octopus Energy Ltd
Two paid-for social media ads, two website landing pages, a radio ad, a billboard and an email for Octopus Energy didn't include adequate substantiation.
-
Barclays Bank plc
A magazine ad was unlikely to give a misleading impression of Barclay’s overall contribution to carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions.
-
Shell UK Ltd
A TV ad didn’t give a misleading impression of Shell’s environmental impact.
-
TotalEnergies SE
A paid-for X ad for TotalEnergies omitted material information about the proportion of their overall business activities that comprised lower-carbon activities.
-
OceanSaver Ltd
A website and TV ad made unsubstantiated environmental claims.
-
EDF Energy Ltd
A radio ad was misleading as it omitted information and didn’t make the basis of the claims made in the ad clear.
-
ScottishPower Energy Retail Ltd t/a Scottish Power
A TV ad featuring George Clarke wasn't quickly recognisable as an ad and led viewers to believe they were watching a programme.
-
Lloyds Bank plc
A paid-for LinkedIn post for Lloyds Bank was misleading as it omitted significant information about the company’s environmental impact.
-
Wizz Air Hungary Ltd
A paid-for Google ad for Wizz Air gave a misleading impression of their flights’ environmental impact by not making the basis of comparative claims clear or providing verifying information.
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 (19)