Pricing and charges

Helpful information on the advertising rules for the pricing of products and services and additional charges, not including legally required costs such as taxes or VAT.

Our rules state that price statements must relate to the product featured in the ad and not a variation of the make or model, and should not mislead by omission, undue emphasis or distortion. We also advise advertisers to refer to the BIS Pricing Practices Guide when preparing their ads.

Another area of complaint we often see is the recommended retail price (RRP) of a product or service. Ordinarily, even if advertisers can provide documentary evidence that the quoted RRP in the ad was recommended by the manufacturer of the product this might not be enough, and any complaints received may get upheld. We require advertisers to be able to demonstrate the product has actually been sold at the advertised price. If an advertiser is the only seller of a product, and so has set the price themselves, it is unlikely to be acceptable to refer to the price as an RRP.

The advertising rules for the pricing of products also state that advertisers shouldn’t use “from” and “up to” claims to exaggerate the availability of a product at a given price. We apply a rule of thumb that 10% of products or services advertised should be available at the “from” or “up to” price stated in the ad, and we have upheld complaints about companies who were unable to sufficiently prove this.

We have also upheld complaints about ads that don’t make additional charges prominent and clear, such as the price of delivery or processing. If a consumer is able to collect the product themselves, delivery charges are not required in the headline price. Any statements that imply delivery is free including those that say “free delivery on orders over £50” or similar, should be avoided if this offer is not attainable for everyone, i.e. additional charges apply to certain postcodes.

+ Read more - Show less

Latest rulings

ATR Brands Ltd t/a Antler
- Upheld
- 02 September 2026
Two emails and a website page for a luggage retailer misleadingly implied a promotion included all products they sold, by stating a promotion related to “everything” or applied “sitewide” when this was not the case.
Nectar Sleep Ltd
- Upheld
- Website (own site)
- 12 August 2026
The homepage for the Nectar Sleep website made misleading saving claims and didn’t make the basis of their savings claims clear. They also made comparisons against other brands’ prices without ensuring the claims were based on the actual price of the product.
Motorpoint Ltd
- Upheld
- Social media (paid ad)
- 24 June 2026
A paid-for Instagram ad for a used car retailer made misleading savings claims.
Parc AI Ltd t/a Parc
- Upheld
- Leaflet, brochure, catalogue or directory
- 24 June 2026
A leaflet for a car parking app didn’t make clear it was an ad and caused unjustified distress by resembling a parking ticket.

View all rulings

Pricing and charges

Helpful information on the advertising rules for the pricing of products and services and additional charges, not including legally required costs such as taxes or VAT.

Latest news

No more grey areas: fair representations for every generation

Good intentions don’t always prevent harm – avoiding harmful racial stereotypes

Regulating the Illusion of Intelligence in Ads

All that glitters isn’t compliant – advice for jewellery ads

Charm Over Alarm: make sure your ads for dating services don’t give the ick

Renters Rights Act May 2026 – what does it mean for your ads?

Latest rulings

ATR Brands Ltd t/a Antler

Nectar Sleep Ltd

Motorpoint Ltd

Parc AI Ltd t/a Parc

Help getting it right

Popular advice

Prices: General

Prices: Recommended retail prices (RRPs)

Promotional savings claims

Relevant codes