Rulings (187)
  • ARSJ Holding Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (on own site), Social media (paid ad)
    • 11 May 2022

    We upheld complaints against health claims in an ad for Brite Drinks.

  • Brand Evangelists for Beauty Ltd

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

    We banned an ad for making claims about a caffeinated hair product that couldn’t be substantiated.

  • 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.

  • Shop Direct Home Shopping Ltd t/a Very, very.co.uk, Littlewoods, littlewoods.com

    • Upheld
    • Radio
    • 11 May 2022

    This ruling replaces one from November 2021; however, we have continued to uphold the complaint.

  • Tesco Mobile Ltd t/a Tesco Mobile

    • Upheld in part
    • National newspaper (paid ad), Poster, Social media (paid ad)
    • 11 May 2022

    We banned ads for replacing expletives with food terms.

  • UAB Ekomlita t/a nuubu

    • Upheld
    • Internet (display)
    • 11 May 2022

    We partly upheld complaints against ads for kitchen knives.

  • WaterWipes UC

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 29 June 2022

    A paid-for Facebook ad for wipes was banned because ‘world’s purest wipes’ was found to be a misleading and unverifiable claim.

  • OPTILASE (UK) LIMITED

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site), Internet (sponsored search)
    • 22 June 2022

    An online promotion for laser eye surgery was found to be misleading and irresponsible.

  • Person(s) unknown

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site), Internet (sponsored search)
    • 22 June 2022

    We banned an online ad for a company claiming to be able to treat depression and other medical conditions, over unsubstantiated claims over treatments’ efficacy.

  • Capri Sun GmbH

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience, young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.

  • First Trenitalia West Coast Rail Ltd t/a Avanti West Coast

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A website for a train company made misleading claims that its ticket prices could not be beaten.

  • IMC Toys UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience, young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.

  • IMC Toys UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience, young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.

  • PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power

    • Upheld
    • Television, VOD
    • 15 June 2022

    A TV and VOD ad by a bookmaker broke the rules by portraying gambling as taking priority in life over family and encouraging repetitive or frequent participation in gambling.

  • PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power

    • Not upheld
    • Radio
    • 15 June 2022

    A radio ad for a bookmaker did not break the rules on harm and offence on the grounds of innuendo or portrayal of gender stereotypes

  • PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power

    • Not upheld
    • Radio
    • 15 June 2022

    A radio ad for a bookmaker did not break rules on harm and offence with regards to references to emigration and sporting rivalries.

  • Take Stock Foods Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 15 June 2022

    A paid-for TikTok post for a soup company broke the rules by claiming that its food products could treat or cure acne.

  • Ten Percent Music Elite Group Ltd t/a TPM the Label

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 15 June 2022

    An Instagram post promoting a prize draw did not award prizes as described and was not administered fairly.

  • Trailfinders Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Brochure
    • 15 June 2022

    A holiday brochure was misleading because it did not make it sufficiently clear that special offers on free nights and free room upgrades were subject to restrictions. 

  • U K Insurance Ltd t/a Churchill

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 15 June 2022

    A banner ad was unlikely to be obviously identifiable as such by its audience - young children, and therefore ‘enhanced’ disclosure was required.