-
Ashlen Inc
A paid-for Facebook ad misleadingly stated that a hair pin collection was being withdrawn and failed to include an end date for a promotion.
-
Kentesh Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad misleadingly stated that a clothing collection was being withdrawn and failed to include an end date for a promotion.
-
Person(s) unknown t/a Goodysee
A paid-for Facebook ad misleadingly stated that a clothing collection was being withdrawn and failed to include an end date for a promotion.
-
Adidas UK Ltd
An Instagram story on Tanya Burr’s account featuring affiliate links wasn’t obviously identifiable as an ad.
-
Nike Retail BV
A paid-for X ad for The Sole Supplier, featuring Nike trainers, was misleading as most people would reasonably assume that the trainers were for adults when, in fact, they were intended for older children. The omission of this material information prompted people to click through and find out more.
-
Reiss Ltd
An Instagram reel on Lydia Millen’s account posted together with Instagram stories featuring affiliate links to the products shown in the reel weren’t obviously identifiable as ads.
-
Sterling Wholesale Ltd t/a Moncrief
A website made misleading claims that all of its products were handmade in Italy, and that they had frequently been featured in top international fashion magazines.
-
Future Farm Plant-Based Food UK Ltd t/a Future Farm
The product packaging for a Future Farm Future Burger, seen on 9 February 2024, featured a promotion. Text on the front of the packaging stated, “WIN £1000 BUY ME AND SCAN TO ENTER *T&C’S APPLY”. A QR code was in the centre of the text.
-
We Are TALA Ltd
Two Instagram reels and four TikToks on influencer Grace Beverly's accounts were not obviously identifiable as ads.
-
Prettylittlething.com Ltd t/a Prettylittlething.com
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.
-
The Sky Mining Company Ltd t/a Sky Mining
A press ad, Instagram ad and website did not make it clear that the company’s diamonds were synthetic, which was misleading.
-
Sparks Information PTE Ltd t/a Hunting Sniper
A paid-for Facebook ad for Hunting Sniper, a mobile app game, featured realistic footage of harm to animals, which was likely to cause widespread offence and unjustified distress.
-
MNG-Mango UK Ltd
A product listing for a sweater featured a model who appeared to be unhealthily thin.
-
Calvin Klein Inc
[Republished ruling] Three posters for Calvin Klein did not objectify women, but one was inappropriate for display in an untargeted medium.
-
OneCompress
Two paid-for Facebook ads for bamboo gloves and socks made medical claims for unlicensed products.
-
Grandbing Technology Co Ltd t/a On Fancy
A website for an online clothing retailer portrayed a child in a sexual way and was irresponsible.
-
Charles Tyrwhitt Shirts Ltd
A paid-for Facebook ad for Charles Tyrwhitt, a clothing retailer, seen on 28 July 2023, featured an image of a print cotton shirt. Text on the post stated “[…] We’re proud to be a Carbon Neutral business”.
-
CrypticKits
A TikTok post and Instagram post misleadingly implied that people could buy football shirts for £1
Rulings
Our rulings are published every Wednesday and set out on the public record how, following investigation, the advertising rules apply and where we draw the line in judging whether an ad has broken the rules. We also publish a list of companies and organisations which, following receipt of a complaint, agreed to amend or withdraw their ad without the need for a formal investigation.
Rulings (18)