The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has made 11 rulings this week. The complaints raised concerns such as misleading environmental claims and misleading claims regarding trader identity and location, delivery times, refund policies, and product materials. Decisions relating to misleading advertising reflect a shift in the ASA's enforcement approach following the entry into force of the unfair commercial practices provisions of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, Part 4, Chapter 1.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received 75 complaints, including from Adfree Cities and Carbon Tracker, regarding a TV ad by Shell UK Ltd, which was challenged for giving a misleading impression of Shell’s environmental impact. The ASA did not uphold the complaints.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received five complaints regarding advertisements by Person(s) unknown t/a Velora London, an online clothing retailer. The complaints challenged the misleading impression of the company's UK base, delivery times, refund policies, product materials, and omission of geographical address. The ASA upheld all complaints. Four other like rulings were upheld against other persons unknown. These rulings represent a change in the ASA's enforcement approach. Following the introduction of the unfair commercial practices provisions of the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, Part 4, Chapter 1 which entered into force on 6 April 2025, the ASA is expected to take a much stricter approach to misleading advertising. This includes any failure to provide material information that is required to be given to consumers under the Act.

Two complaints were received by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) regarding an Instagram post promoting weight loss medication. The ASA upheld the complaints. This ruling forms part of a wider body of work on prescription-only medicines (POMs) used for weight loss. Of the 18 rulings handed down this week, 9 focus on similar issues.

The Advertising Standards Authority has upheld 14 complaints about various ads and informally resolved nine. The upheld complaints focused on ads about misleading mid-contract broadband price increases, failures to state the end dates of various promotions, as well as an ad challenged due to it being an ad for a product high in fat, salt or sugar (HFSS) which was targeted at children.

Ofcom has designated the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) to regulate online advertising of less healthy food and drink products, pursuant to its designation powers under the Communications Act 2003 (CA 2003). Ofcom is satisfied that, among other factors, the ASA is a fit and proper body to be designated, has access to financial resources that are adequate to ensure the effective performance of Designated Functions and that it will comply with Ofcom’s statutory and regulatory obligations. The Designated Functions conferred on the ASA include taking calculated steps to determine whether an advertiser is contravening or has contravened the relevant requirements of the CA 2003 and to draft, review and revise guidance, with the help of the Secretary of State, setting out how they are complying with the CA 2003. This Designation will be effective till 31 October 2034, after which a renewal will discussed.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has updated its Non-broadcast and Broadcast Complaint Handling Procedures following a comprehensive review to modernise and simplify the documents, improve governance and introduce procedural changes. The revised procedures, which took effect on 29 May 2026, clarify when complainants with a clear interest in a case or a relevant public profile must have their identity or expertise disclosed to other parties and identified in published rulings. They also confirm that the ASA may refuse to accept evidence submitted late during a formal investigation unless it could not reasonably have been provided earlier.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has updated its guidance on promotional savings claims in advertising. The ASA has emphasized that reference prices must represent genuine established usual selling prices, considering factors such as recency, duration, pricing history, sales data, and sales channels. The guidance clarifies that 'up to' and 'from' claims should not exaggerate potential savings, with a significant proportion (typically over 10%) of items available at the maximum discount. The ASA has also stressed that introductory offers must be clearly described as such. Recent rulings against companies like Simba Sleep Ltd and Debenhams highlight the ASA's continued focus on preventing misleading savings claims in advertisements.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has updated its guidance on the advertising of in-game purchases. The guidance sets out what advertisers must do to advertise in-game purchases, and the games that feature them, responsibly and without misleading consumers. A review of the guidance has been undertaken to ensure that it remains helpful to the industry and that consumers remain protected amid the growth in the gaming industry. The review has confirmed that the guidance remains accurate and appropriate and only minor amendments have been made.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld two complaints against AirDoctor LLC and health.detective Garstang Health Food Store Ltd concerning a TikTok post promoting the AmazingAir filter. The ad, which appeared on 27 December 2024, was not clearly identifiable as a marketing communication and included unlicensed medical claims regarding the treatment of a persistent cough in a child. The ASA found that the post featured a QR code linking to a purchase page, indicating a commercial intent that was not disclosed through labels such as '#ad'. The ad also claimed that the air filter could alleviate cough symptoms, but no evidence was provided that the product was appropriately licensed or CE-marked as a medical device. As a result, the ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 2.1, 2.3 and 12.1. The advertisers failed to respond to the ASA’s enquiries, breaching rule 1.7. The ASA instructed the ad must not appear again in its current form and referred the matter to CAP’s Compliance team.

Commercial analysis: The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld complaints about a competition for subscribers to The Sun’s Dream Team fantasy football competition to win a date with a Page Three girl. What does the decision mean for advertisers and their legal advisers?

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld a complaint concerning a Boots promotion for a free No7 face lotion, reinforcing that promoters must take reasonable steps to anticipate likely demand and ensure adequate availability of promotional items. The ASA emphasised that qualifications such as ‘subject to availability’ and ‘while stocks last’ do not remove the obligation to avoid causing participants unnecessary disappointment.