-
Imiracle (HK) Ltd t/a ELFBAR
A poster ad and digital billboard ad for Elfbar vapes misleadingly omitted information about limited recycling options, mislead about the environmental benefit the products offered and misleadingly highlighted an environmental benefit that comes from a legal obligation which also impacts competing products.
-
Renault UK Ltd t/a Dacia, Renault
A paid-for Meta ad misleading claimed that a hybrid car drove “Up to 80% electric driving in the city”, which was unclear.
-
Harvey Water Softeners Ltd
A website that claimed consumers could “save up to £1100” and reduce energy bills by 30% was misleading and couldn’t be substantiated.
-
Repsol SA
A paid-for online display ad omitted significant information about the overall impact of the business’ carbon footprint.
-
Hamilton Direct Ltd
A website that claimed pellets for fuel tanks could restore lost performance and reduce emissions was misleading.
-
4AIR LLC
A paid-for Google ad, for 4AIR LLC misleadingly understated the environmental impact of their service.
-
One Source Digital Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for an ECO funding and government grant scheme misleadingly implied that the company was endorsed by or affiliated with the UK Government.
-
Prime Star Shop Ltd t/a Branshaws
A press ad for an Electric Heater misleadingly implied that their mini heater provided a viable alternative to gas central heating and that it could save consumers money compared to gas central heating.
-
Sky UK Ltd
The website for Sky Business broadband made savings claims that were not available to all consumers and misleading price comparisons.
-
Fortress Energy Solutions Ltd
A leaflet for a voltage optimiser products retailer misleadingly claimed the product could save on energy bills.
-
Hyundai Motor UK Ltd
A digital billboard, YouTube video and marketing brochure advertising Hyundai’s IONIQ 5 model, misleadingly claimed that the vehicle could charge from 10% to 80% in 18 minutes using a 350 kW charger.
-
Anglian Water Services Ltd t/a Anglian Water
A TV ad and video on demand (VOD) ad for a water company misleadingly omitted material information about its history of releasing sewage into the environment.
-
Severn Trent Water Ltd
A TV ad for a water company did not mislead or omit significant information.
-
Petroliam Nasional Berhad t/a PETRONAS
A TV ad for Petronas misleadingly omitted material information about the balance of its current activities, its emissions, and the pathway to reducing them.
-
Repsol SA
A paid-for online display ad for Repsol, misleadingly omitted material information including how and when Repsol would achieve net zero emissions, and the role that the development of biofuels would play in that plan.
-
Shell UK Ltd t/a Shell
A poster, a TV ad, and a YouTube ad for Shell misleadingly omitted material information about the proportion of their business activities that were comprised of lower carbon activities.
-
Intrepid Travel Group UK Ltd
A poster for a travel company misleadingly minimised the impact of their holidays on the environment.
-
Sky UK Ltd
A TV ad for Sky misleadingly exaggerated the performance of Sky’s fibre broadband in its capability to provide coverage throughout a home and improve patchy Wi-Fi.
-
Prism Marketing Group Ltd t/a Green Energy Voucher
A Facebook post and a landing page for a home improvement saving company exaggerated the efficacy of spray foam insulation and misleadingly implied consumers could get a discount on its installation.
-
Roofsure Ltd t/a RoofSURE Ltd
A newspaper ad for a home solutions retailer made misleading claims that their spray foam insulation could reduce heat loss by a specific amount, did not hold evidence that their product was the most efficient and were unable to prove claims making comparisons with identifiable competitors.
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following 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, following receipt of a complaint, agreed to amend or withdraw their ad without the need for a formal investigation.
Rulings (28)