-
BPerfect Ltd
A series of Instagram story posts on Charlotte Dawson’s account were banned for failing to disclose they were ads, as well as using filters to exaggerate a product’s efficacy
-
BrewDog plc
A paid-for Instagram post by Brewdog was banned for making misleading nutrition claims for an alcoholic drink and for making other non-permitted nutrition claims.
-
DRTY DRINKS Ltd
Two Instagram posts by a drinks company were banned for making misleading nutrition claims for an alcoholic drink and for encouraging excessive drinking.
-
Boux Avenue Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad featuring a woman wearing lingerie did not break the CAP Code as the model did not appear to be unhealthily thin.
-
Lanistar Ltd
A digital banking company could not adequately substantiate the claim in its Instagram profile that they were “the world’s most secure payment card”.
-
Channel Four Television Corporation
A website ad for Channel 4 was not found to be misleading.
-
Max Mara Fashion Group Srl
A magazine ad for a clothing retailer was banned for including a model who appeared unhealthily thin.
-
Missguided Ltd
An Instagram post by influencer Zara McDermott promoting Missguided products was banned for not being obviously identifiable as an ad.
-
Not Guilty Food Co Ltd t/a The Skinny Food Co
A Facebook post promoting spice mixes was banned as the product’s name implied that it could help consumers lose weight.
-
Grey Technology Ltd t/a Gtech
Two newspaper ads and a website ad for a vacuum cleaner were banned for implying the product could completely eliminate dust clouds without holding adequate evidence to prove this.
-
Vauxhall Motors Ltd
A TV ad for the Vauxhall Corsa was not found to be misleading.
-
Campylite Investments Ltd
A YouTube video and blog post for a building consultant were banned for denigrating one of their competitors by claiming they were scammers.
-
Bio-Medical Research Ltd t/a Slendertone
A TV ad for a toning belt was banned for misleadingly implying that the product was able to affect the size of the waist by visibly firming and toning the abdominal muscles.
-
Hutchison 3G UK Ltd t/a 3
A TV, website and paid-for search ad by Three Mobile were banned for not holding adequate substantiation to support the claim that they were the ‘best network for data.”
-
Telefonica UK Ltd t/a O2
A TV and newspaper ad for O2 which claimed it was the “UK’s No.1 Network” was found to be misleading because the comparisons it made with competitors were not clear.
-
Boohoo.com UK Ltd in association with Luke Mabbott
A TikTok post by an influencer promoting the fashion retailer Boohoo breached the CAP Code as it was not obviously identifiable as an ad.
-
HardDisk Direct Ltd
A website ad for an IT hardware retailer was banned for containing misleading scores from a third-party review website.
-
Skinny Tan Ltd in association with Elly Norris
Two Instagram stories by an influencer promoting a beauty product were banned for applying a filter which misleadingly exaggerated the effect the product was capable of achieving.
-
We Are Luxe Ltd t/a TANOLOGIST TAN, in association with Cinzia Baylis-Zullo
An Instagram story by an influencer promoting a beauty product was banned for applying a filter which misleadingly exaggerated the effect the product was capable of achieving.
-
Unilever UK Ltd
A paid-for Facebook post by Boots was banned for implying that a lotion product could protect babies’ skin microbiome without holding sufficient evidence to demonstrate that this was the case.
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 without the need for a formal investigation.
Rulings (30)