Background

This ruling forms part of a wider piece of work on the availability of advertised hotel prices. The ads were identified for investigation following intelligence gathered by our Active Ad Monitoring system, which uses AI to proactively search for online ads that might break the rules. See also related rulings published on 19 November. 

Ad description

Two paid-for website ads for Accor (UK) Ltd, a hotel provider: 
 
a. The first ad, seen on 5 May 2025, stated “ibis budget Birmingham Centre from £27”. 
 
b. The second ad, seen on 27 April 2025, stated “ibis budget Sheffield Arena from £33”.

Issue

The ASA challenged whether the price claims in ads (a) and (b) were misleading and could be substantiated. 

Response

Accor (UK) Ltd said the advertised “from” prices seen in ads (a) and (b) were accurate and reflected rates available for consumers at the time the ads were seen. They believed they could substantiate both claims. 
 
In relation to ad (a), Accor stated that a price of £27 was available at the ibis budget Birmingham Centre for a night’s stay on 30 July 2025, and was bookable on 5 May 2025, the date the ad was seen. The £27 rate was not limited to one room type but was available across all room types within the hotel. They stated that on that date, 212 rooms were available for £27, which was over 80 per cent of the hotel’s inventory. They believed that demonstrated that the advertised price was genuinely available. They also stated that, in the 60 days after the ad was seen, thousands of rooms were available for approximately £30, which demonstrated that their prices were similar to those advertised. They provided a spreadsheet which they stated contained the relevant pricing data. 
 
For ad (b), Accor stated that rooms which were marginally cheaper than the advertised rate at £32.65 were available on multiple dates in the 60 days after the ad was seen. They stated that on 27 April when the ad was seen, over 1,700 rooms were bookable at or below £33 between 10 May and 10 July 2025, which represented 23 per cent of the hotel’s inventory. They believed this demonstrated that the “from” price was widely available. They provided a spreadsheet containing price and availability data for the ibis budget Sheffield Arena from the end of April to the end of October 2025.

Assessment

Upheld in relation to ad (a) only 

The CAP Code stated that price claims such as “up to” and “from” must not mislead by exaggerating the availability of the advertised product. CAP guidance also stated that the availability of a product at the “from” price should be spread evenly across the advertised travel period, and that marketers should make clear the specific period to which an offer related. 
 
The ASA considered that consumers would understand the claim “ibis budget Birmingham Centre from £27” in ad (a) to mean that a significant proportion of rooms at that hotel would have been available to book for £27. In the absence of any qualifications or date restrictions in the ad, we considered that consumers would expect to be able to find rooms at that price across a range of dates. We therefore expected the advertiser to hold evidence, in the form of pricing and availability data, to demonstrate that a significant proportion of the advertised rooms were available at the “from” price across a range of dates. Such data should include information about the number of rooms available at the advertised price, and the number available at other prices, to allow a comparison to be made. 
 
However, we understood that the advertised price was only available to book for a night’s stay on 30 July 2025. Whilst a large number of rooms in the hotel were available for £27 on that date, we considered that availability of the advertised price was not evenly spread across a period of time, and subsequently was not a true reflection of the price most consumers could expect to pay. We therefore concluded that, in the absence of any information to indicate the date on which rooms for £27 were available, the price claim in ad (a) was misleading and could not be substantiated. 
 
Ad (b) featured the claim “ibis budget Sheffield Arena from £33”. We considered that consumers would understand from the claim that a significant proportion of rooms at that hotel were available to book for £33. Accor provided a spreadsheet containing availability and pricing data for 176 dates at the ibis budget Sheffield Arena between April and October 2025. We understood the data highlighted that a significant proportion of rooms had been available for £32.56, marginally cheaper than the advertised price, and that the dates on which that price was available were spread evenly throughout that time period. We therefore concluded that the pricing claim in ad (b) had been substantiated and was not misleading. 
 
Ad (a) breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation) and 3.17 and 3.22 (Prices). 
 
We also investigated ad (b) under rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation) and 3.17 and 3.22 (Prices), but did not find it in breach.

Action

Ad (a) must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Accor (UK) Ltd to ensure that when using “from” price claims in the future, a significant proportion of rooms across a range of dates were available at the advertised price. 

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1     3.7     3.17     3.22    


More on