Rulings (25)
  • Beer52 Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 18 December 2024

    Two email promotions omitted significant conditions.

  • Heineken UK Ltd t/a Heineken

    • Upheld in part
    • Internet (display)
    • 18 December 2024

    A paid-for online display ad for Heineken 0.0 didn’t include a prominent statement of ABV.

  • Origin Sleep UK Ltd t/a Origin Mattress

    • Upheld
    • Website (own site)
    • 18 December 2024

    A website implied that a promotion was time limited when this wasn’t the case, made misleading and unsubstantiated savings claims and made unsubstantiated claims about the health properties of their products.

  • Churchill Retirement Living Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 04 December 2024

    A national newspaper ad failed to include the significant conditions of a promotion, including a closing date.

  • Samsung Electronics (UK) Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 27 November 2024

    A website promotion misleadingly described a promotional item as “free”, did not make clear promotional items would have to be purchased upfront before being redeemed via a cashback mechanism and omitted significant conditions.

  • Suntory Global Spirits UK Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 16 October 2024

    A post on Bowmore Single Malt Whisky’s Facebook page in partnership with Aston Martin linked alcohol with driving and was irresponsible.

  • DAMM 1876 LTD

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 25 September 2024

    Two Instagram reels on alcohol brand Estrella Damm’s own account linked alcohol with activities or locations in which drinking would be unsafe or unwise.

  • Sports Supplements Ltd t/a Bulk

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 04 September 2024

    An email contained a promotion which wasn't capable of being used and so wasn't administered fairly.

  • William Grant & Sons Ltd t/a Hendricks Gin

    • Not upheld
    • Video on demand
    • 04 September 2024

    A Video on Demand ad for Hendricks Gin wasn't likely to particularly appeal to under-18s.

  • Aston Manor Ltd t/a Crumpton Oaks

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 14 August 2024

    A TV ad for Crumpton Oaks Cider was not likely to strongly appeal to under 18s.

  • Sky UK Ltd t/a NOW

    • Upheld
    • Website (ad feature)
    • 31 July 2024

    A website ad for NOW TV omitted material information about the inclusion of ads in basic streaming membership plans.

  • XIX Vodka Ltd

    • Upheld in part
    • 12 June 2024

    A YouTube video on the Sidemen’s YouTube channel, seen on 8 October 2023. The video was titled “KSI & W2S CONTROL THE SIDEMEN FOR THE DAY”. The video featured the Sidemen doing challenges around London in two teams. At approximately 16 minutes into the video, a title card quickly appeared that rep...

  • Kingsland Drinks Ltd t/a Kingsland Wines & Spirits

    • Upheld
    • 22 May 2024

    A label on a bottle mislead consumers by failing to disclose the significant conditions of a competition.

  • Hangcure Ltd t/a Hangcure

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 15 May 2024

    A TikTok ad for a hangover cure claimed that a food supplement could treat human disease.

  • Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 15 May 2024

    A series of tweets misleadingly implied that a promotion included all product lines, failed to include the closing dates or times of the promotion and misleadingly implied that further discounts would not be available when the promotion ended.

  • Whitbread Group plc t/a Premier Inn, Beefeater

    • Upheld
    • Search (paid)
    • 01 May 2024

    A paid-for search ad made misleading claims about the price of hotel rooms.

  • Global Brands Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (influencer or affiliate ad)
    • 13 March 2024

    A TikTok post on Danielle Walsh’s account irresponsibly encouraged excessive drinking and wasn’t obviously identifiable as an ad.

  • Banquist Ltd t/a Banquist, Winedrops

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 06 March 2024

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a wine retailer irresponsibly encouraged drinking unwisely.

  • Brown-Forman Beverages Europe Ltd t/a Jack Daniel's

    • Upheld
    • Poster
    • 28 February 2024

    A poster irresponsibly implied that drinking alcohol could overcome boredom and promoted adopting unwise drinking styles.

  • DUSK (Retail) Ltd

    • Not upheld
    • Television
    • 28 February 2024

    A TV ad did not irresponsibly imply that drinking alcohol had therapeutic qualities and could be used to cope with parenthood.

Informally resolved (4)
  • Veblen Wines Ltd

    • 24 July 2024
    • Number of complaints: 0

    Topic: Alcohol

  • Naked Wines plc t/a Naked Wines, www.NakedWines.com Ltd

    • 17 July 2024
    • Number of complaints: 0

    Media: Circular
    Topic: Alcohol

  • Benefex Ltd

    • 12 June 2024
    • Number of complaints: 1

    Topic: Promotions and competitions

  • Whitbread Group plc

    • 05 June 2024
    • Number of complaints: 1

    Topic: Alcohol