Rulings (28)
  • Jones Whyte Law Ltd t/a Jones Whyte

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 24 September 2025

    A website and paid-for Facebook ad for James Whyte, relating to group action compensation claims for people who had been affected by a data breach, failed to present material information clearly and also omitted material information.

  • KP Law Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 24 September 2025

    A website and a paid-for Facebook ad for Join the Claim, relating to group action compensation claims by people who had been affected by a data breach, falsely implied that the advertiser was acting for purposes outside its business, didn’t make their commercial intent clear, didn’t present material informa...

  • Lloyds Bank plc t/a Lloyds Banking Group (LBG)

    • Upheld
    • National press
    • 20 August 2025

    A national press ad for Lloyds Bank misleadingly implied that they had made donations to social housing projects and omitted significant information that put these claims into context.

  • Monzo Bank Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 09 July 2025

    A TV ad for Monzo and ITV Sport was obviously recognisable as an ad.

  • Neilson Financial Services Ltd t/a British Seniors

    • Not upheld
    • 28 May 2025

    A TV ad didn't show an infant in an unsafe sleep position.   

  • Turner Lewis Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 28 May 2025

    A TikTok post and a website misled people about the nature of their business, omitted material information, took advantage of people's inexperience and credulity and failed to be upfront about significant qualifications. 

  • Rosenthal Capital Ltd t/a ULEZProsperity

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 07 May 2025

    A website made misleading and unsubstantiated investment returns claims and promoted a financial product in a way that couldn't be easily understood.

  • FX Compared Ltd t/a FXcompared

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 23 April 2025

    A website made misleading savings claims and implied that the international money transfer providers they recommended were the top providers compared to all other providers when they only included providers from a limited sector of the market. It also failed to make clear that a result listing was an ad. 

  • Intelligent Lending Ltd t/a Ocean Finance

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Internet (display)
    • 19 February 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad and display ad irresponsibly encouraged consumers to spend regularly on non-essential purchases using a credit card.

  • Connect UK Sales Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 12 February 2025

    A paid-for Facebook ad and website landing page didn’t make clear that the value of investments was variable and failed to provide evidence to substantiate investment claims and price comparisons.

  • Family Vision Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 12 February 2025

    A paid-for Facebook ad irresponsibly encouraged the use of credit agreements to fund Christmas spending.

  • Land Profits EDU Ltd t/a Land Profits

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Website (own site)
    • 12 February 2025

    Two paid-for Facebook posts and a website didn’t make clear that the value of investments was variable and that examples of past performance weren’t necessarily a guide to the future and also failed to substantiate objective claims.

  • Luxury Lodge Estates Company Ltd t/a Luxury Lodges

    • Upheld
    • Magazine (paid ad)
    • 12 February 2025

    A magazine ad didn’t make clear that the value of investments was variable, and that examples of past performance weren’t necessarily a guide to the future. It also failed to make the nature of a guarantee clear and didn’t include non-optional fees.

  • SteadyPay Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 12 February 2025

    A paid-for Meta ad irresponsibly encouraged people to borrow money for the Black Friday sales and to spend more than they could afford.

  • Zimran Ltd t/a Prosperi Academy

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Internet (video)
    • 15 January 2025

    A paid-for YouTube ad for an app offering financial investment training courses didn't make clear that the value of investments was variable and irresponsibly took advantage of people's lack of experience by implying that investment was straightforward and that large returns could be made with minimal time and ...

  • Wahed Invest Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Poster
    • 08 January 2025

    Six posters which appeared on the TfL network caused serious offence by featuring images of burning US dollar and Euro banknotes.

  • get_0ut_0f_debt Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 11 December 2024

    A video on the get_0ut_0f_debt TikTok account was irresponsible and caused serious offense and unjustified distress.

  • Aurum & Argenti Ltd t/a Bullion Club, bullionclub.co.uk

    • Upheld
    • Website (paid ad)
    • 20 November 2024

    A paid-for Google ad failed to make clear that gold investment was unregulated, that the value of investments was variable and that examples of past performance weren’t necessarily a guide to the future.

  • Gold Warehouse Ltd t/a Gold Bank

    • Upheld
    • Radio
    • 20 November 2024

    Three radio ads, which implied that gold had investment potential, were broadcast on a non-specialist radio channel.

  • Gold Warehouse Ltd t/a Gold Bank

    • Upheld
    • Press other (paid ad)
    • 20 November 2024

    A press ad failed to make clear that gold investment was unregulated and that the value of investments was variable.