Rulings (18)
  • Solihull Health Check Clinic

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 14 October 2020

    A website ad for a health clinic was banned for stating that a COVID-19 antibody test was 100% accurate and for implying that a positive result would show that people were immune to the disease.

  • The Private Harley Street Clinic

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 22 April 2020

    Claims on a website that an IV drip treatment could prevent or treat coronavirus/COVID-19 broke the advertising rules.

  • Easy Shopping 4 Home Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (OM 3rd party)
    • 04 March 2020

    A product listing on Amazon for face masks claiming to protect consumers from coronavirus was misleading and irresponsible and likely to cause fear without justifiable reason.

  • REVIV UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site)
    • 22 April 2020

    Claims on a website that an IV drip treatment could prevent or treat coronavirus/COVID-19 broke the advertising rules.

  • Go-Vi Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 23 June 2021

    A website ad for an air and surface purifier was banned for stating it could destroy Covid-19 without holding sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim.

  • Evaq Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 30 June 2021

    A website ad for facemasks was banned for misleadingly stating that the masks could kill Covid-19.

  • Manuka Doctor (UK) Ltd

    • Upheld
    • National newspaper (ad feature)
    • 06 January 2021

    A newspaper ad for a brand of honey was banned for implying that it could be used as a treatment for coughs and for implying that its “anti-microbial” properties could treat diseases.

  • Novads OU

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site), Internet (display)
    • 04 March 2020

    Paid-for display ads and website claims for face masks claiming to protect consumers from coronavirus were misleading and irresponsible and likely to cause fear without justifiable reason.

  • Cosmetic Medical Advice UK Ltd t/a Dr Rita Rakus Clinic

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 22 April 2020

    Instagram posts that implied an IV drip treatment could help to prevent people from catching coronavirus/COVID-19 broke the advertising rules.

  • Vic Smith Bedding Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Regional press
    • 11 March 2020

    A newspaper ad for mattresses was banned for being offensive as it associated immigrants with diseases such as the coronavirus.

  • PCK SKIN (Manchester) Ltd t/a SkinSpaceUK

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 13 May 2020

    A promotional email, by an aesthetic clinic, offering vitamin injections broke the rules by promoting prescription-only medicines to the general public.

  • Freudenberg Household Products LP t/a Vileda

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 11 August 2021

    An email from an industry news outlet was banned for implying that their microfibre cloth could remove Covid-19 with a high level of efficacy without having sufficient evidence to substantiate the claim.

  • Copper Clothing Ltd t/a Copper Clothing

    • Upheld
    • Radio
    • 13 October 2021

    A radio ad for a facemask was banned for misleadingly implying that it could rapidly de-activate COVID-19 particles.

  • Profit Accumulator Ltd t/a Bonus Accumulator

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 14 October 2020

    A paid-for Facebook post and a website post for a betting company were banned for presenting gambling as a way to achieve financial security, for being misleading and for being socially irresponsible.

  • Jemella Ltd t/a GHD

    • Upheld
    • Internet (social networking)
    • 04 November 2020

    A TikTok post by Emily Canham about a GHD branded hairdryer was banned for not being obviously identifiable as an ad.

  • Cignpost Diagnostics Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Newspaper
    • 21 July 2021

    A newspaper ad for a PCR testing programme was banned for promoting behaviour that contradicted government advice on social distancing.

  • DRTY DRINKS Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 07 July 2021

    Two Instagram posts by a drinks company were banned for making misleading nutrition claims for an alcoholic drink and for encouraging excessive drinking.

  • BrewDog plc

    • Upheld in part
    • National newspaper (paid ad)
    • 18 November 2020

    Poster and press ads for BrewDog beer broke the rules on offence by using a reference to an expletive in media targeted to a general audience. The same ad appearing in targeted magazines did not break the rules.

Informally resolved (27)
  • VST Enterprises Ltd

    • 20 January 2021
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Julia Charles Event Management Ltd

    • 08 April 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Collagen Aesthetics Ltd

    • 29 April 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Lloyds Pharmacy Ltd

    • 16 June 2021
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Midland Health Ltd

    • 11 November 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Nuriss Skincare and Wellness Centre Ltd

    • 15 April 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • MI Hub Ltd

    • 16 December 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Good Health Centre

    • 13 May 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Medichecks.com Ltd

    • 13 May 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Owlchemy Ltd

    • 29 April 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • NoteMachine UK Ltd

    • 26 January 2022
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Tonic Nutrition Ltd t/a Tonic Health

    • 07 October 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Energy Saving Grants Ltd

    • 11 August 2021
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Lema (UK) Ltd

    • 03 June 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • The Dog & Duck Outwood (unconfirmed)

    • 17 June 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Happy Tan Catshill Ltd

    • 29 July 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • FLR Spectron Ltd

    • 22 April 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • The One Stop Miracle Shop Ltd

    • 22 July 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • Easylife Group Ltd

    • 03 June 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1

  • The Enterprise Department Ltd

    • 28 October 2020
    • Number of complaints: 1