Rulings (27)
  • British Gas Services Ltd t/a British Gas

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 04 March 2026

    A paid-for Meta ad for British Gas, which promoted switching to a heat pump, didn’t have enough evidence to demonstrate that ‘up to’ saving claims could be achieved by a significant proportion of people and also failed to include all material information.

  • Centrica Hive Ltd t/a Hive

    • Upheld
    • National newspaper (paid ad)
    • 04 March 2026

    A national press ad for Hive promoting solar panels didn’t have enough evidence to demonstrate that ‘up to’ saving claims could be achieved by a significant proportion of people and also failed to include all material information.

  • WashWater UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Brochure
    • 25 February 2026

    A brochure for a water conditioning and purifying system manufacturer misleadingly implied their water treatment systems could target and remove existing limescale, reduce hot water bills and help improve certain skin conditions. 

  • Virgin Media Ltd

    • Upheld in part
    • Television
    • 18 February 2026

    A TV ad for Virgin Media didn’t provide sufficient information to enable people to verify comparisons with identifiable competitors. Another issue was investigated but it didn’t break the rules.

  • GGRS Energie Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Local or regional newspaper (paid ad)
    • 26 November 2025

    A regional press ad for GGRS Energie made exaggerated and unsubstantiated savings claims about solar installation and failed to include all material information.

  • Good Energy Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 26 November 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad for Good Energy made unsubstantiated savings claims about greener home installation and failed to include all material information.

  • Stove Industry Alliance Ltd t/a Stove Industry Association

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 05 November 2025

    A website for the Stove Industry Association made unsubstantiated claims that modern stoves emitted significantly lower emissions than open fireplaces or older stoves, and that they were a low-emission way to heat a home. It also failed to make the basis of comparative environmental claims clear. 

  • Shell Energy UK

    • Not Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 01 October 2025

    A paid-for LinkedIn ad for Shell Energy didn't give a misleading impression of the overall environmental impact of Shell’s business activities.

  • Barrhead Travel Service Ltd t/a Barrhead Travel

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 03 September 2025

    A paid-for Google ad for a travel agency gave a misleading impression of the advertised cruises’ environmental impact by failing to make the basis of environmental claims clear and not holding robust substantiation to support them.

  • Sunshine Cruise Holidays Ltd t/a cruise 1st

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 03 September 2025

    A webpage advertising a cruise operator failed to make the basis of environmental and comparative claims clear, didn’t hold appropriate evidence to support such claims and omitted material information about the environmental impact of the cruises they sold.

  • TravelCircle Ltd t/a Cruise Circle

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 03 September 2025

    A webpage advertising cruise operator failed to make the basis of environmental and comparative claims clear and didn’t substantiate the environmental claims made in relation to the full life cycle of a cruise.

  • www.Cruise.co.uk Ltd t/a SeaScanner

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 03 September 2025

    A webpage advertising a cruise operator made misleading environmental and comparative claims, including by omitting material information about the environmental impact of the advertised cruise ship.

  • Contact Solar Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 27 August 2025

    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

    • Not upheld
    • Email
    • 13 August 2025

    A marketing email did not mislead consumers about an exclusive offer to switch gas suppliers.

  • Aira Home UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 06 August 2025

    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

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 06 August 2025

    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

    • Upheld
    • Local or regional newspaper (paid ad)
    • 06 August 2025

    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

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 06 August 2025

    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

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 30 July 2025

    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

    • Not upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 09 July 2025

    Paid-for LinkedIn, Google and Instagram ads featuring a Formula 1 car did not make misleading environmental claims.