Rulings (45)
  • Lloyds Bank plc

    • Upheld in part
    • Poster, Social media (paid ad)
    • 18 December 2024

    A paid-for LinkedIn post for Lloyds Bank was misleading as it omitted significant information about the company’s environmental impact.

  • Vivostore Ltd t/a Vivo Life

    • Upheld
    • Social media (own site)
    • 18 December 2024

    Two TikTok ads stated that a food supplement could treat vitamin B12 deficiency or its symptoms, irresponsibly encouraged people to stop taking medically prescribed vitamin B12 injections and made unauthorised specific health claims.

  • Wizz Air Hungary Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Website (paid ad)
    • 27 November 2024

    A paid-for Google ad for Wizz Air gave a misleading impression of their flights’ environmental impact by not making the basis of comparative claims clear or providing verifying information.

  • Supreme CBD Ltd t/a Supreme CBD

    • Upheld
    • 13 November 2024

    A post on Anthony Fowler’s X account made unauthorised health claims about CBD.

  • Just Eat.co.uk Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 23 October 2024

    A webpage and an email promotion for Just Eat didn't include all significant conditions of the promotion and caused unnecessary disappointment to participants.   

  • Sainsbury's Supermarkets Ltd t/a Sainsbury's

    • Upheld
    • 16 October 2024

    An Instagram story posted by Kayleigh Johnson linked to a product listing on Sainsbury’s website which had the effect of marketing infant formula to the general public, which is prohibited under the Code, while affiliate links were not obviously identifiable as ads.

  • Kerry Foods Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 09 October 2024

    A video on demand ad for a HFSS product featuring the licensed character Garfield and a promotion broke the rules by being directly targeted at pre-school or primary school children.

  • Huel Ltd

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

    An Instagram video made non-permitted comparative nutrition claims and compared foods that weren’t in the same category. It also made misleading pricing claims and contained general health claims that weren’t accompanied by an authorised specific health claim.

  • Not Guilty Food Co Ltd t/a The Skinny Food Co

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

    A Facebook ad made "low calorie" nutrition claim and comparing calorie content with a competitor broke the ad rules by making unsubstantiated nutrition claims and failing to meet the required conditions for such comparisons.

  • NothingFishy Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 18 September 2024

    A paid-for Instagram ad made claims that a food supplement could treat symptoms of Covid-19 and also made unauthorised specific health claims.

  • Just Eat.co.uk Ltd t/a Just-Eat.co.uk

    • Upheld
    • Internet
    • 21 August 2024

    A paid-for Facebook ad for Just Eat failed to use appropriate targeting to ensure an ad featuring HFSS products wasn't directed at under 16s.

  • Huel Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 14 August 2024

    Two paid-for Facebook ads for Huel featuring a testimonial from Steven Bartlett misleadingly omitted that he was one of the company's directors.

  • Quintain Living Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (website content)
    • 14 August 2024

    A website made misleading claims about the average saving customers would make on energy costs and claimed that a package included free Wi-Fi and work from home areas, when these were just included in the package price.

  • Gelcard Ltd t/a Water2

    • Upheld
    • Email
    • 31 July 2024

    An email advertising a water filter caused unjustified fear or distress on the basis of misleading claims.

  • Simmer Ltd

    • Upheld
    • Internet (display)
    • 17 July 2024

    A Facebook post and paid-for TikTok ad misleadingly implied that an endorsement was genuine and related to their product. 

  • London Luton Airport Ltd t/a Luton Rising

    • Upheld
    • 10 July 2024

    A magazine ad and a poster for Luton Rising did not adequately qualify the claims made in the ad and omitted material information about the environmental impact of London Luton Airport’s expansion.

  • Wessex Water Services Ltd

    • Upheld
    • 10 July 2024

    A TV ad for Wessex Water did not adequately qualify the environmental claims made in the ad and omitted material information about the company’s environmental impact.

  • Aspire Nutrition

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 03 July 2024

    A paid-for Facebook ad made claims that a supplement could help to prevent, treat or cure autism. 

  • Happy Koala LLC t/a Happy Mammoth

    • Upheld
    • Social media (paid ad)
    • 03 July 2024

    A paid-for Facebook ad for a weight-loss supplement made unauthorised health claims, made claims that people could lose fat from specific parts of the body and referred to a rate or amount of weight loss which is prohibited by our rules. 

  • Mitchells & Butlers Leisure Retail Ltd t/a Harvester

    • Upheld
    • 03 July 2024

    A website promotion for the Harvester app misleadingly omitted material information about the significant limitations and qualifications of the promotion

Informally resolved (6)
  • Kentucky Fried Chicken (Great Britain) Ltd t/a KFC

    • 24 July 2024
    • Number of complaints: 0

    Topic: Food, drink and supplements

  • Grocery Delivery E-Services UK Ltd t/a HelloFresh

    • 26 June 2024
    • Number of complaints: 0

    Topic: Food, drink and supplements

  • Roofoods Ltd t/a Deliveroo

    • 26 June 2024
    • Number of complaints: 0

    Topic: Food, drink and supplements

  • Waitrose Ltd t/a Waitrose & Partners

    • 19 June 2024
    • Number of complaints: 1

    Topic: Food, drink and supplements

  • Wowcher Ltd t/a Wowcher

    • 19 June 2024
    • Number of complaints: 1

    Topic: Food, drink and supplements

  • Ello Group Ltd t/a Coffee Club

    • 12 June 2024
    • Number of complaints: 1

    Topic: Food, drink and supplements