-
Astrasoft Projects Ltd t/a Sofiadate.com
A paid-for Facebook ad featured harmful stereotypes likely to cause serious or widespread offence.
-
Banquist Ltd t/a Winedrops
A paid-for Facebook ad and sponsored Instagram story made unsubstantiated price comparison claims and misleadingly implied that reviews and ratings were from a third-party review website when this wasn't the case.
-
Health Line
Two paid-for Facebook ads misleadingly exaggerated the capabilities of laser eye treatment, falsely implied that they directly provided laser eye treatment themselves and didn't make clear that they received a commission for their service.
-
The Essence Vault Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad made misleading pricing claims.
-
Zimran Ltd t/a Prosperi Academy
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 ...
-
Better Health and Wellness
A paid-for Facebook ad was misleading as it didn’t make clear the nature of the content people would be served if they engaged with the ad.
-
Health and Wellness
A paid-for Facebook ad was misleading as it didn’t make clear the nature of the content people would be served if they engaged with the ad and also exaggerated the capability of laser eye treatment.
-
Lloyds Bank plc
A paid-for LinkedIn post for Lloyds Bank was misleading as it omitted significant information about the company’s environmental impact.
-
Marketing VF Ltd t/a The Eco Experts
A paid-for Facebook ad for a laser eye surgery referral company falsely implied they were acting for purposes outside their business and that they directly provided laser eye surgery when this wasn’t the case. The ad also failed to make clear that they receive a commission for their service and misleadingly exagg...
-
Person(s) unknown t/a Sereni
A paid-for Meta ad made medical claims for a product which didn’t have the relevant compliance labels.
-
Valterous Ltd t/a Therapie Clinic
A paid-for Facebook ad indirectly advertised a prescription only medicine to the public.
-
Alchemy Bros Ltd t/a Energy Grant Access
A paid-for Meta ad offering a home efficiency scheme grant misleadingly implied that the company was endorsed by or associated with the Scottish Government, falsely implied that they were acting for purposes outside their trade and didn’t make their commercial intent clear.
-
ECO4U LTD
Four paid-for Facebook ads offering a home efficiency scheme grant misleadingly implied that the company was endorsed by or associated with the UK Government, falsely implied that they themselves were offering grants and didn’t make the nature of their business clear.
-
Ignite Sustainable Energy Ltd t/a ignitese.co.uk
Two paid-for Facebook and Instagram ads offering a home efficiency scheme grant misleadingly implied that the company was endorsed by or associated with the UK Government.
-
Impact Energy Ltd
Two paid-for Meta ads offering a home efficiency scheme grant misleadingly implied that the company was endorsed by or associated with the UK Government.
-
Lead Pronto Ltd t/a LeadPronto
Four paid-for Meta ads offering a home efficiency scheme grant misleadingly implied that the company was endorsed by or associated with the UK Government, falsely implied that they themselves were offering grants for a free boiler, and didn’t make the nature of their business clear.
-
Ovira Australia t/a Ovira UK
Three paid-for Meta ads made unauthorised specific health claims, referred to an amount of weight loss, implied a food could prevent, treat or cure PCOS and symptoms of the menopause and made medicinal claims for an unlicenced product.
-
Pulsio Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad made misleading and unsubstantiated savings claims.
-
Bodystreet Franchise (UK) Ltd
A paid-for Instagram ad for a fitness centre made misleading claims that a 20-minute session per week was equivalent to three one-hour sessions at a regular gym.
-
Solomon Global Ltd t/a Buy Bullion
A paid for Facebook 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.
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.
Rulings (81)