Rulings (229)
  • Care Pharma Bradford Ltd t/a The Care Pharmacy

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 07 October 2026

    A paid-for Google search ad for an online pharmacy promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.

  • MedExpress Enterprises Ltd t/a MedExpress

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 07 October 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for MedExpress promoted prescription-only medicines to the public, against the law and our rules.

  • Menwell Ltd t/a Do Health

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 07 October 2026

    Two ads for a health app incorporating a blood testing programme misleadingly implied that their blood tests could prevent and diagnose medical conditions or that their service could provide more tailored specific advice than pre-existing advice, without the evidence to support these claims.

  • Esaverwatt.com t/a StopWatt

    • Upheld
    • Website (commercial classified)
    • 30 September 2026

    A product listing on Amazon for a smart home energy monitoring brand misleadingly exaggerated the effectiveness of the product by making claims that it could save electricity, reduce electricity waste and lower energy bills.

  • Huel Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site), App (paid ad)
    • 30 September 2026

    An Instagram video and pre-roll ad on YouTube for Huel was irresponsible by encouraging the exclusive consumption of Huel in place of conventional food. The ads also made unathorised specific health claims.

  • Harnbury Holdings Ltd t/a San Carlo

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 23 September 2026

    An Instagram post by Pamela Olender for the restaurant San Carlo Cicchetti wasn’t obviously identifiable as an ad and broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product. 

  • Here We Flo Ltd t/a Flo

    • Social media (own site)
    • 23 September 2026

    Three Instagram posts for a period product company made misleading environmental claims, including by failing to make the basis of environmental claims clear. 

  • Morley's (Fast Foods) Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 23 September 2026

    An Instagram post by Ellie Scotney for Morley’s UK broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product. 

  • Reliable Medicare Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 23 September 2026

    Three product listings on the website of a medical aesthetics and skincare supplier made misleading savings claims. 

  • The Trade Desk, Inc

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 23 September 2026

    A promoted LinkedIn post from a media buying platform broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food. 

  • Whitworths Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 23 September 2026

    An Instagram post on the WhitworthsUK page made unauthorised health claims and implied that a food could prevent or treat human disease. 

  • McCain Foods (GB) Ltd t/a McCain Foodservice Solutions

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 16 September 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad for McCain Foods and Five Akhi’s restaurants broke the rules by featuring an identifiable less healthy food product.

  • Pimlico Plumbers Ltd t/a Pimlico

    • Not upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 16 September 2026

    A website for Pimlico Plumbers that made ‘24/7 service’ claims wasn’t misleading.

  • Hemios

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad), Internet (display)
    • 09 September 2026

    A paid-for Facebook ad and a paid-for YouTube display ad for a magnetic bracelet made misleading claims in relation to weight-loss and improving erectile performance.

  • Lotus Leisure Ltd t/a DialAFlight

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 09 September 2026

    A paid-for Meta ad for a travel agent didn’t make the basis for their environmental claims clear.

  • OneStream Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 09 September 2026

    A website for OneStream didn’t make clear that their broadband packages included free trials that automatically renewed for a fee.

  • Thomas Cook Tourism (UK) Company Ltd t/a Thomas Cook

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 09 September 2026

    A paid- for Google ad for Thomas Cook didn’t make the basis for their environmental claims clear.

  • We Love Holidays Ltd t/a loveholidays

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 09 September 2026

    Two paid-for Google ads for loveholidays didn’t make the basis for their environmental claims clear.

  • ATR Brands Ltd t/a Antler

    • Upheld
    • 02 September 2026

    Two emails and a website page for a luggage retailer misleadingly implied a promotion included all products they sold, by stating a promotion related to “everything” or applied “sitewide” when this was not the case. 

  • Frasers Group Trading Ltd t/a Sports Direct

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 02 September 2026

    A product page on the Sports Direct website made misleading claims about reference price and associated savings.