Clothing, shoes and jewellery

Helpful information on the advertising rules for products or services that relate to any type of wearable garment or accessory, and the fashion industry in general.

Ads for clothing, shoes and jewellery often come under fire for promoting unhealthy body images and causing body confidence issues by showing unrealistic body types. While this is a wider societal debate and provides challenges that regulation doesn’t hold all the answers to, we do our best to ensure ads are responsible and have banned ads that don’t encourage positive body image.

The advertising rules state that ads should be prepared with a degree of social responsibility and in fashion ads, this can mean making sure models don’t appear unhealthily thin. It’s also important in the fashion industry to make sure children are protected and we have strict rules on protecting children from sexualised images and being the object of sexualisation themselves.

Images that feature suggestive or sexualised imagery such as children in heavy make-up or provocative poses are likely to fall foul of our rules. Advertisers should be aware these rules apply to models that look under the age of 16 even if they are in fact older.

Other symbols of youth, such as school uniforms, are also almost certainly unacceptable if used in a sexual context.

Another problem area for ads relating to clothing, shoes and jewellery is hidden charges such as delivery or costs for returning goods. Advertisers, especially those whose sales are largely or exclusively via the Internet, often offer goods at prices that exclude delivery charges. This is only acceptable under the advertising rules if the customer can collect the product themselves, say from a warehouse or retail outlet.

Advertisers should also avoid using definitive claims such as "FREE DELIVERY WHEN SPENDING OVER £200" and "FREE DELIVERY ON ALL ORDERS" if additional delivery charges apply to some postcodes.

+ Read more - Show less

Latest rulings

Boohoo.com UK Ltd in association with Luke Mabbott
- Upheld
- Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
- 10 February 2021
A TikTok post by an influencer promoting the fashion retailer Boohoo breached the CAP Code as it was not obviously identifiable as an ad.
In The Style Fashion Ltd t/a In the Style
- Upheld
- Internet
- 06 January 2021
A website and Instagram post by an online fashion retailer were banned for implying that all their products were included in an offer when this was not actually the case.
Under Armour UK Ltd
- Upheld
- Internet (on own site)
- 19 August 2020
A website ad for Under Armour misleadingly stated that a T-shirt could improve the wearer’s strength and endurance.
Lemongrassrice Ltd
- Upheld
- Social media (paid ad)
- 24 June 2020
A paid-for Facebook post by an online retailer made misleading claims that its product, a bra, could reduce the risk of breast cancer.

View all rulings

Clothing, shoes and jewellery

Helpful information on the advertising rules for products or services that relate to any type of wearable garment or accessory, and the fashion industry in general.

Latest news

Thinking outside the (subscription) box

Collect Clothes, Not Complaints: Charity collection bags

Sexualised Imagery in fashion ads

Picture perfect? Advertising and body image

Don’t miss out on this ‘Daily Deal’ Insight!

Sexualisation of children: perfume and underwear ads

Latest rulings

Boohoo.com UK Ltd in association with Luke Mabbott

In The Style Fashion Ltd t/a In the Style

Under Armour UK Ltd

Lemongrassrice Ltd

Help getting it right

Popular advice

Social Responsibility: Body Image

Weight control: Garments

Enforcement Notice: Misleading 'Faux Fur' claims in clothes and accessories

Relevant codes