Rulings (207)
  • PEL Consultancy Services Ltd t/a PEL Investigations

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 11 May 2022

    We banned an ad for a private investigation agency for having unsubstantiated claims.

  • Lipstick Gangster Ltd t/a The Lipstick Gangster

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 12 July 2023

    A post on a beauty clinic’s Facebook page promoted an unlicensed medicinal product and made misleading and unsubstantiated claims about the efficacy of a treatment.

  • Funeralbooker Ltd t/a Beyond

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 08 January 2020

    Claims on a funeral comparison website were misleading.

  • Aldi Stores Ltd t/a Aldi

    • Upheld
    • Press general
    • 17 July 2019

    "Save 45%". Small text at the bottom of the page stated "Based on a comparison of Aldi … for Tesco. Aldi prices and packaging correct as of 07/12/18. Subject to availability. For full product comparison details see [URL]".

    skewed the price comparison in Aldi's favour, and that the ad did not make sufficiently clear that … product, challenged whether the price comparison was misleading. Aldi Stores Ltd said that own-brand … versus brand comparisons, and multi-product comparisons, were inherently permissible. The inclusion

  • BVG Group

    • Upheld
    • Brochure
    • 03 July 2019

    , specification and design - though each product will clearly not be identical. Exact comparisons can … be found on each product on our website. Comparison prices correct as of 3rd July 2018”.

    The complainant challenged whether the comparisons between the advertiser’s and the … products on the high street. However, to ensure that comparisons were fair they said that they updated … their price comparisons every month to ensure that they remained current and that they made it clear

  • Serenity Technologies Ltd t/a Neocremations

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 05 August 2020

    A website ad for a cremation service was banned for denigrating the company’s competitors.

  • Grapevine Europe Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Television
    • 20 May 2020

    A TV ad for a car buying comparison site misled consumers about what personal information was needed to obtain valuations from their website.

  • Zzoomm plc

    • Upheld
    • Direct mail
    • 10 January 2024

    A direct mailing misleadingly stated the savings someone could make with their broadband service.

  • 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

  • Tesco Stores Ltd t/a Tesco

    • Upheld in part
    • National press, Television
    • 18 September 2019

    TV and press basket comparison ads for Tesco were found to be misleading.

  • Sky UK Ltd

    • Upheld in part
    • Internet (website content)
    • 26 July 2023

    The website for Sky Business broadband made savings claims that were not available to all consumers and misleading price comparisons. 

  • Uber BV

    • Upheld
    • App (paid ad), National newspaper (ad feature)
    • 05 April 2023

    REPUBLISHED RULING: A paid-for ad and a national press ad for Uber made misleading and unsubstantiated claims about the staff benefits the company provided.

  • Iceland Foods Ltd t/a Iceland

    • Not upheld
    • National press
    • 29 April 2020

    A national press ad for a supermarket did not make a misleading price comparison.

  • Parcel2Go.com Ltd t/a Parcel2go

    • Upheld in part
    • Internet (on own site), Email
    • 01 April 2020

    A website and an email for a parcel delivery comparison website omitted information about parcel restrictions and misled consumers about their ratings.

  • Volkswagen Group United Kingdom Ltd t/a Audi

    • Upheld
    • VOD
    • 06 March 2024

    A Video on Demand ad for an electric car featured misleading claims about charging time and mileage.

  • Procter & Gamble UK t/a Always

    • Upheld
    • Television
    • 29 November 2023

    A TV ad for Always Discreet incontinence pads did not compare the product to the most appropriate version from the leading brand, and contained on-screen text whose placement misleading implied that 95% of women surveyed preferred the Always Discreet pad to the maxi pad from the leading brand.

  • The Secret Diamond Academy

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 26 April 2023

    Two posts on the Facebook page of a beauty salon advertised training courses for sclerotherapy, without making clear the nature, requirements, qualifications and professional registration details of the course.

  • Oneade

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 04 May 2022

    We banned an ad for using filters to exaggerate a beauty product’s efficacy.

  • Parcel2Go.com Ltd t/a Parcel2go

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 19 February 2020

    A 'Next Day+ Delivery' claim on a parcel delivery comparison website was banned for being misleading.

  • Outsourceful Ltd t/a Outsourceful

    • Upheld
    • Email, Internet (website content)
    • 24 January 2024

    An email and website for a recruitment agency perpetuated harmful racial stereotypes and were likely to cause serious offence.

Informally resolved (87)
  • Live-In Care Direct

    • 20 December 2023
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • TalkTalk Telecom Ltd

    • 21 April 2021
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • British Telecommunications plc

    • 02 November 2022
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Trading 212 Ltd

    • 17 February 2021
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Native Snacks Ltd

    • 20 April 2022
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Wren Kitchens Ltd

    • 01 December 2021
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Vodafone Ltd

    • 23 August 2023
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • B&Q plc

    • 02 September 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Proper Leads Ltd

    • 04 May 2022
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • 4MM Ltd

    • 20 April 2022
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • The Media Den Ltd

    • 13 March 2024
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Neil Taylor Insolvency Ltd

    • 29 July 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • GoDaddy Operating Company LLC

    • 03 June 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Top Online Partners Group Ltd

    • 12 February 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Conservatory Insulations Northwest Ltd

    • 23 August 2023
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • The Chord Company Ltd

    • 29 June 2022
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Insight Retail Group Ltd

    • 22 July 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Toyota (GB) plc

    • 28 October 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Premier Inn Hotels Ltd

    • 18 March 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • BetterCo Ltd

    • 26 July 2023
    • Number of complaints: 1