Ad description
A TV ad for Pure Cremation, seen in January 2026, featured a woman standing in her home surrounded by various plates of food and a selection of drinks. She said, “That was a great celebration. Dad would have loved it. He hated how expensive traditional funerals are. So he got a Pure Cremation funeral plan. He wanted his money to go to us, not funeral expenses. Dad chose Pure Cremation because it’s the best-selling funeral plan in Britain. It was a proper, dignified cremation. They were so respectful. Pure have their own beautiful crematorium, and they hand delivered his ashes in an urn, and stayed for a cup of tea and a chat. Then, we used some of the money he saved to remember him our way”. A disclaimer stated, “Pure cremations don’t include a ceremony at the crematorium so are more affordable than a traditional funeral”. The camera then panned to show more of the food and drink items, as well as flowers and family pictures. On-screen text stated, “Get your free quote for Britain’s favourite funeral plan”.
Issue
Twelve complainants challenged whether the ad misleadingly implied the standard plan included an in-person service.
Response
Pure Cremation Funeral Planning Ltd t/a Pure Cremation believed the ad did not imply that the standard package included an in-person service or ceremony at the crematorium. They said the purpose of the ad was to show that choosing Pure Cremation meant families did not have to pay for a ceremony and that it conveyed the opposite impression to that alleged in the complaints.
They said the ad made clear, through an on-screen disclaimer which stated, “Pure cremations don’t include a ceremony at the crematorium so are more affordable than a traditional funeral”, that an in-person service was not included. They explained that consumers could choose to include an in-person service for an additional cost. They added that, even where families chose that option, the overall cost would still be lower than that of a traditional funeral.
Pure Cremation said the ad’s setting and wording were intended to show a private celebration taking place at home, rather than a service at the crematorium. They said the line, “That was a great celebration. Dad would have loved it”, was delivered while the woman was shown in a home kitchen surrounded by cakes, flowers, photographs, fairy lights, half-eaten food and empty glasses. They believed the setting made clear that the celebration took place at home. They said the ad made no reference at any point to a “crematorium service” or “crematorium ceremony”.
Pure Cremation also said the line, “It was a proper, dignified cremation. They were so respectful. Pure have their own beautiful crematorium, and they hand delivered his ashes in an urn, and stayed for a cup of tea and a chat”, accurately described the service provided and did not suggest that a ceremony or service at the crematorium was included. They said references to ashes being hand-delivered and staff staying for “a cup of tea and a chat” further emphasised the home setting rather than the crematorium. They said the later line, “Then, we used some of the money he saved to remember him our way”, accompanied by a wider shot of the home setting, reinforced that the family’s celebration was separate from the cremation itself and took place at home.
They said the ad reflected customer feedback, which indicated that families who chose Pure Cremation often arranged their own celebration or service for a deceased family member or friend. They said that was often held at home, in a village hall, or in another meaningful location.
Pure Cremation said the ad complied with relevant Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) regulations.
Clearcast supported Pure Cremation’s view that the ad did not misleadingly imply that the standard package included an in-person service.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA understood that Pure Cremation offered a cremation plan and that, unless viewers paid an additional cost, the plan did not include an attended service at the crematorium. Mourners could attend the crematorium to receive their loved one’s ashes, but there was no commemorative service.
We considered that, in the absence of any service, the advertised plan was not one that viewers were likely to understand to be a traditional funeral. We understood that the FCA considered the term “funeral plan” was not, of itself, misleading simply because the plan was limited to a non-attended cremation. However, given the plan on offer was not what viewers were likely to regard as a typical funeral, we considered it was important that the ad accurately and explicitly conveyed the nature of the service being offered.
We considered that funeral arrangements were likely to be of particular importance and sensitivity to consumers because they related to a loved one’s memorial or tribute. In that context, details of what was and was not included in the advertised plan were material information and therefore needed to be presented clearly.
The ad featured a woman in her home, surrounded by food, drinks, flowers and family photographs, describing her father’s Pure Cremation funeral plan and the family’s remembrance of him. We acknowledged Pure Cremation’s view that the ad did not imply that the standard package included an in-person service, and that on-screen text stated, “Pure cremations don’t include a ceremony at the crematorium so are more affordable than a traditional funeral”. However, we considered viewers were likely to understand from the woman’s statement, “It was a proper, dignified cremation. They were so respectful. Pure have their own beautiful crematorium, and they hand delivered his ashes in an urn”, together with the repeated references to a “funeral plan”, that the plan offered more than the practical arrangements for a non-attended cremation alone.
We considered that describing the crematorium as “beautiful” and the cremation as “dignified” suggested a personal and ceremonial element to the service. We also considered viewers were likely to assume that the woman’s ability to describe the cremation in those terms meant she had some basis on which to reflect on the experience directly, and therefore that some form of attended ceremony or service had taken place, for which she had been present. We did not consider that the references to hand delivering ashes, or to staff staying for “a cup of tea and a chat”, would necessarily imply, in isolation, that an attended service at the crematorium was included. However, in the context of the ad as a whole, we considered those references contributed to an impression of a personal and supported funeral experience. We considered that, unless the limitations of the plan were made sufficiently clear, that overall impression was likely to be understood by viewers as including some attended element.”
We acknowledged that the home setting, food, drinks, flowers and family photographs were intended to show a private celebration taking place after the cremation. However, we did not consider it was sufficiently clear from the ad that the private celebration was in place of, rather than in addition to, any attended service at the crematorium. Instead, we considered viewers were likely to interpret the ad as showing one part of a wider funeral experience, and to understand that the advertised plan included some attended element.
We acknowledged that the disclaimer stated that a service or ceremony at the crematorium was not included. However, we considered that information was not sufficient to override the overall impression created by the language used in the ad.
For those reasons, we concluded that the ad misleadingly implied that the standard Pure Cremation package included an in-person funeral service, when that was not the case.
The ad breached BCAP Code rules 3.1 and 3.2 (Misleading advertising).
Action
The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told Pure Cremation Funeral Planning Ltd t/a Pure Cremation to ensure their ads did not imply that their standard funeral plan included an attended funeral service if it did not, and to make clear where a plan was limited to a non-attended cremation.
