ASA Rulings Tracker: 72 UK Ad Rulings Tagged by Claim Type

Data last verified: 17 October 2026. Figures re-checked against their primary sources under the Whito rolling re-verification programme.

Built from: every formal ruling the Advertising Standards Authority published on its weekly rulings page across 12 Wednesdays, 29 July to 14 October 2026 (72 rulings). Each one was opened, read and tagged by hand on 17 October 2026. Advertiser names are left out of this page; every row links to the ASA’s own ruling.

Most “can I say this in my ad?” answers are written as legal prose, one case at a time. The answer is already on the public record, every Wednesday. Of 72 formal ASA rulings published in the 12 weeks to 14 October 2026, 66 went against the advertiser, and all 28 cases the ASA opened itself were upheld.

This page turns that record into one dated table. Each ruling is tagged by sector, the type of claim, where the ad ran, who raised it and what happened. Use it to check a line before you publish it, not after a complaint lands.

The short answer, by claim type

If your ad makes one of these claims, this is what happened to everyone else who made it in the last 12 weeks.

What the 72 rulings show

Six in ten rulings came from outside the ASA. All of the ASA’s own cases were upheld.

Members of the public raised 31 of the 72 cases, organisations such as Which?, Bite Back, BBC Watchdog, a regulator, a professional body and a product manufacturer raised 9, and competitors raised 4. The ASA opened the other 28 itself, mostly from its own monitoring of online ads. All 28 were upheld. The ASA says on several of these rulings that the ads were found by its Active Ad Monitoring system, which uses AI to search for online ads that may break the rules. You do not need a complaint against you to end up in a ruling.

Price claims and health claims lost every time

All 8 price, discount and “free” rulings went against the advertiser, and so did all 15 health and medical claim rulings. Every price case was raised by someone outside the ASA: shoppers, a competitor, a manufacturer and Which?. If you put a crossed-out price, an RRP or a “save up to” figure on your site, keep the evidence of what you actually charged and when.

Your own website counts as an ad

11 rulings were about the advertiser’s own website, with no paid placement involved, and 10 of those went against the advertiser. The ASA judged homepage banners, product pages and “about me” pages under the same rules as paid ads. A further 4 rulings covered posts on brands’ own social accounts.

Paid social is where most of the trouble ran

39 of the 72 rulings were mainly about a paid social media ad, mostly on Facebook and Instagram. Paid search followed with 6. Only 4 were mainly about print, posters or broadcast.

Competitors win when they complain

Competitors brought 4 cases and 3 were upheld: one on prices, one on a “most trusted” claim and one on environmental claims. The fourth, a rival challenging a plumber’s 24-hour emergency claim, was not upheld because the plumber showed evidence of jobs booked throughout the night. We covered that case in how call logs saved a 24/7 claim.

Rulings the advertiser won, fully or in part

Six rulings were not upheld and three were upheld only in part. Less healthy food was the claim type most often cleared: 3 of the 9 cases were not upheld. In two, the ASA found the food shown was not a specific, identifiable less healthy product, so it treated the ad as a brand ad outside the rule. In the third, the advertiser showed it employed fewer than 250 people, and food and drink businesses of that size are exempt from the rule. A fourth food case, a convenience chain’s sponsored chocolate ad, was cleared on the paid ad but upheld on its landing page. Two horror film campaigns, a casino display ad, an “unlimited” data claim and the plumber’s 24-hour claim make up the rest.

Advertisers who ignore the ASA are mostly not in the UK

In 14 rulings the advertiser did not respond to the ASA. 13 of those 14 had an overseas address or no address on the ruling. Among advertisers with a UK address, only 1 of 46 failed to respond.

The full table

Filter by sector or claim type. “Ruling” opens the ASA’s published decision. Dates are the Wednesday the ASA published the ruling.

How we built it

• We filtered the ASA rulings page to rulings published from 23 July to 17 October 2026. That returned 72 formal rulings across 12 weekly releases, 29 July to 14 October. The same filter listed 107 cases resolved informally, which are not in this table because the ASA does not publish a ruling for them.
• We opened every ruling and recorded the outcome, the media and the Code rules the ASA tagged on the ruling page, the number of complaints, who raised the case, whether the advertiser responded and whether the ruling gives a UK address, an overseas address or none.
• We then tagged each ruling by hand with one sector and one main claim type from fixed lists, and wrote a plain description of the claim and of what the ASA told the advertiser to do. Where a ruling covered several issues, the claim type is the one most of the ruling was about.
• “Went against the advertiser” means upheld or upheld in part. “ASA own investigation” means the ruling says the ASA challenged the ad, rather than a named complainant.

Limits

• Twelve weeks is a short window, and the ASA groups some rulings into projects (weight-loss medicines, stem cell clinics, AI apps, eco labels on holidays). That pushes some claim types up in a given quarter. The table is a record of what was ruled on, not a measure of how common each breach is.
• Formal rulings are a small slice of the ASA’s work. Most cases are closed informally or through compliance work and never become a published ruling.
• Sector and claim type are our tags, not the ASA’s. The ASA’s own wording in each linked ruling is the authority.
• The rules column holds the Code rules the ASA tags at the foot of each ruling. The ruling text sometimes cites more, for example rule 1.7 when an advertiser did not respond, so read the linked ruling for the full list.
• This page is not legal advice. For a specific ad, read the CAP Code and the ASA’s own advice, or ask CAP’s free Copy Advice service.

How this page stays current

This is a dated record. Each new week of rulings goes in as new rows with its own date, and the figures in the finding above stay tied to 14 October 2026 so they can be cited. The data was last read on 17 October 2026.

Check your own site first

Ten of the eleven website rulings above were about claims sitting on the advertiser’s own pages. Our free Visibility Check shows how your business looks to customers and AI tools. For the price side, read how the ASA ruled on sale prices on a business’s own website and why “subject to availability” did not protect a free offer. On how cases start, see the ASA scanned 60 million ads with no complaint required.

Download the data

The full table with the Code rules the ASA tagged, complaint counts, who raised each case, advertiser response and address type, and what the ASA required is free: whito-asa-rulings-tracker-2026-10-14.csv (72 rows, CSV).

Cite this

Whito (2026). ASA rulings tracker: 72 UK ad rulings tagged by claim type, 29 July to 14 October 2026. Data read 17 October 2026. https://whito.co.uk/research/asa-rulings-tracker/

Common questions

How many ASA rulings go against the advertiser?

Of 72 formal ASA rulings published in the 12 weeks to 14 October 2026, 66 went against the advertiser: 63 upheld and 3 upheld in part. Six were not upheld.

Can the ASA rule on my own website?

Yes. 11 of the 72 rulings were about advertisers' own websites, with no paid ad involved, and 10 of those went against the advertiser. Claims on your homepage and product pages are covered by the CAP Code.

Does someone have to complain before the ASA acts?

No. The ASA opened 28 of the 72 cases itself, several found by its Active Ad Monitoring system, and all 28 were upheld.

Which ad claims get ruled against most often?

In the 12 weeks to 14 October 2026, health and medical claims led with 15 rulings, all upheld, followed by harmful or offensive content (12) and paid online ads for less healthy food (9). All 8 price, discount and free claim rulings were upheld.

Can a competitor report my ad to the ASA?

Yes. Competitors brought 4 of the 72 cases and 3 were upheld. The one that failed was a rival challenging a plumber's 24-hour claim, which the plumber backed with evidence of overnight bookings.

Do the less healthy food ad rules apply to small businesses?

Not to SMEs with fewer than 250 staff. In a ruling published on 2 September 2026 the ASA cleared a chocolate brand's paid Instagram ad because the company showed it employed fewer than 250 people, and food and drink SMEs of that size are exempt from the online less healthy product rule.

Why are advertiser names not shown?

This page tracks what was claimed and how the ASA ruled, so readers can check their own wording. Every row links to the ASA's published ruling, which names the advertiser.

Whito

Whito is an independent UK research publisher. We publish research on how UK businesses are found, trusted and priced: what they cost to market, how their sectors work, and who actually gets recommended. Studies are free to read, every figure carries the date it was checked, and nobody pays to appear.

See Full Bio