Rulings (14)
  • Person(s) unknown

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 04 August 2021

    An ad on Lauren Goodger’s Instagram account was banned for non-disclosure and failure to highlight risk.

  • UK Insurance Ltd t/a Direct Line

    • Upheld in part
    • Television
    • 21 July 2021

    A TV and radio ads for Direct Line insurance were banned over claims about competitive pricing

  • Ashteck Media Ltd t/a Ashteck Media

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 02 June 2021

    Three Instagram stories by influencers promoting a debt advice company were banned for not making clear the risk and fees of IVAs and for not making their posts obviously identifiable as ads.

  • Laybuy Holdings (UK) Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 26 May 2021

    A website ad for a delayed payment service was banned for misleadingly claiming that the credit checks they performed would not affect consumers’ credit scores.

  • Luno Money Ltd t/a Luno

    • Upheld
    • Poster
    • 26 May 2021

    A poster for a cryptocurrency exchange service was banned for failing to illustrate the risks of investing in Bitcoin and for taking advantage of consumers’ lack of experience by implying that investing in it was straightforward.

  • Money Advisor Ltd t/a Money Advisor

    • Upheld in part
    • Television, Internet (website content)
    • 05 May 2021

    A TV and website ad for a debt advice service were banned for misleadingly implying that they were qualified to provide debt counselling or management services, or that they could help consumers write-off debt.

  • Flexible Digital Solutions Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 07 April 2021

    A paid-for Facebook ad and a website ad for a debt advice service were banned for exaggerating the speed and ease of the process, trivialising the application process and for not stating the risks and fees associated with IVAs.

  • TFLI Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking), Internet (website content)
    • 07 April 2021

    A paid-for Facebook ad and a website ad for a debt advice service were banned for exaggerating the speed and ease of the process, exaggerating the amount of debt that could be written off, as well as several other issues.

  • Person(s) unknown t/a equityreleaseplus.co.uk

    • Upheld
    • Internet (display)
    • 31 March 2021

    A paid-for website ad promoting an equity release company was banned for misleadingly implying their service was associated with Martin Lewis.

  • Coinfloor Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Regional press
    • 17 March 2021

    A press ad for a Bitcoin and cryptocurrency exchange was banned for irresponsibly suggesting that purchasing Bitcoin was a good or secure way to invest one’s savings or pension and for failing to make clear the risks associated with Bitcoin investments.

  • DSG Retail Ltd t/a Currys PC World

    • Upheld
    • 10 March 2021

    A TV ad for Currys PC World was banned for irresponsibly encouraging excessive spending through the use of credit, particularly in relation to purchasing higher value Christmas gifts with a ‘pay later’ payment method.

  • Fidelitas Group Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 27 January 2021

    Five paid-for internet search ads and a website ad for a debt advice service were banned for misleadingly suggesting their service was endorsed by Government bodies and for suggesting they were qualified to provide debt counselling despite not being authorised by the FCA as experts in this field.

  • National Direct Service t/a Step Debt Support

    • Upheld
    • Internet
    • 27 January 2021

    A paid-for internet search ad and a website ad for a debt advice service were banned for exaggerating the speed and ease with which debt could be reduced and for misleadingly suggesting associations with a debt charity and the Government. The matter was referred to CAP’s Compliance team.

  • Studio Retail Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Television, VOD
    • 27 January 2021

    A TV and video on demand ad for a shopping retailer was banned for irresponsibly encouraging excessive spending.