-
ARSJ Holding Ltd
We upheld complaints against health claims in an ad for Brite Drinks.
-
Brand Evangelists for Beauty Ltd
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
We banned an ad for a private investigation agency for having unsubstantiated claims.
-
American Golf (Trading) Ltd t/a Onlinegolf
A website of an online golf retailer misled consumers by omitting significant information about a free trial for a shot tracking device because it did not make clear they would have to pay a subscription to access the data provided by the device
-
Arsenal Football Club plc
[Republished ruling] A Facebook post and website post by Arsenal Football Club promoting fan tokens were misleading because they did not make sufficiently clear that the value of investments in paid-for Fan Tokens was variable and as cryptoassets they were unregulated; omitted material information, including that free ...
-
Lebara Mobile Ltd t/a Lebara Ltd
Claims on the company’s website for its 30-day SIM-only plans were misleading because the “unlimited” minutes and text services were subject to a cap on usage
-
Sky UK Ltd
Claims on a website and in an email about being the “top-performing major broadband provider” and which implied Sky had won an award from Ofcom were misleading
-
Elite Aesthetic Clinic Ltd
Three ads on social media were banned for advertising Kenalog, a prescription-only treatment.
-
Fanatics (International) Ltd
A website promotion was misleading because customers had not received the discount on the advertised product when using a promotional code.
-
FlexFuel-Energy Development
An ad on the company’s website misleadingly implied that misleadingly implied that a hydrogen-injection treatment for engines could reduce carbon emissions without evidence.
-
Golden Leaves Ltd
An ad on the company’s website misleadingly implied that their MDF coffins were more eco-friendly than other options, without sufficient evidence.
-
JC Atkinson & Son Ltd
An ad on the company’s website misleadingly implied that their MDF coffins were more eco-friendly than other options, without sufficient evidence.
-
PCK SKIN (Manchester) Ltd t/a SkinSpaceUK
An ad on the company’s website stated that treatment could eliminate dark circles around the eyes without sufficient evidence
-
PlanetArt UK Ltd t/a FreePrints
An ad on the company’s app misleadingly told consumers they could get free photo prints, without mentioning postage charges.
-
Rank Digital Gaming (Alderney) Ltd
An in-app ad for a mobile casino game irresponsibly suggested that gambling was a way to solve financial concerns and achieve financial security.
-
UK Flooring Direct Ltd
An ad on the company’s website misleadingly implied a particular savings offer was time-sensitive.
-
BetterCo Ltd
Three paid-for ads on Google search falsely implied that the marketer was acting for purposes outside its business and did not make their commercial intent clear.
-
Ella Kate Reeves
Two Facebook pages for Ella Reeves misleadingly claimed she was accredited to the British Association of Counselling and Psychotherapy.
-
Gamer Advantage LLC
An ad aired during a livestream on Twitch made misleading claims that blue-light glasses could improve sleep quality.
-
HeyNutrition Ltd
Three paid-for ads on Google search falsely implied that the marketer was acting for purposes outside its business and did not make their commercial intent clear.
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 (171)