Banned adverts: the most famous UK ads the ASA pulled, and why

Last verified 2 September 2026. The most complained-about advert in British history was a Paddy Power press ad offering money back on bets if Oscar Pistorius was acquitted of murder. It drew 5,525 complaints in March 2014 and the ASA upheld every one. The second most complained-about, Tesco’s double-jabbed Father Christmas of 2021, drew more than 5,000 and was cleared without investigation. That gap, between what the public objects to and what the regulator actually stops, is the whole story of banned adverts in the UK.

This is an evergreen history of the ads the Advertising Standards Authority pulled, the ones it famously did not, and the one everybody thinks it banned but never touched. For each: the year, the complaint, the ruling, the rule and the lesson.

How the ASA works

The ASA was set up in 1962 to keep UK advertising “legal, decent, honest and truthful”. It does not write the rules. The Committee of Advertising Practice writes the CAP Code for non-broadcast media (print, outdoor, online, social, email) and its sister body BCAP writes the broadcast code for TV and radio. The ASA investigates complaints and rules on them. Since 2004 it has regulated broadcast ads under contract from Ofcom, and since 2011 its online remit has covered brands’ own websites and social accounts. It is funded by a levy on advertising spend, collected by two arm’s-length bodies, according to the ASA’s own history.

TV ads pass through Clearcast before they air. Clearcast checks scripts and finished films against the BCAP Code on behalf of the commercial broadcasters, but its approval does not bind the ASA, which can and does uphold complaints against cleared ads. Rulings are published every Wednesday. Sanctions for advertisers who ignore them include ad alerts telling media owners to refuse the work, removal of paid search ads, mandatory pre-vetting for up to two years, and referral to Trading Standards or, for broadcasters, Ofcom.

Banned, upheld, or just complained about

Three words get muddled. “Upheld” is the ASA’s formal finding that an ad breached the code, after which it “must not appear again in the form complained of”. The press calls this a ban. “Not upheld” means the ASA investigated and found no breach. “Most complained about” is a count of public complaints and says nothing about the outcome: of the ASA’s top ten for 2016, none was upheld.

Two other outcomes matter. Some ads are withdrawn by the advertiser before the ASA decides, so no ruling is published. And some ads never reach the ASA at all because Clearcast declines to clear them for TV. Iceland’s orangutan belongs in that last category.

The most complained-about ads of all time

Paddy Power, Oscar Pistorius (2014): 5,525 complaints, upheld

The bookmaker offered “money back if he walks” on the outcome of the Pistorius murder trial. Complaints arrived through an online petition and the ASA ruled on 19 March 2014 that the ad trivialised a murder trial, the death of a woman and disability, and brought advertising into disrepute. It remains the most complained-about non-broadcast ad ever, per the ASA’s 2014 list. Lesson: a live tragedy is not a topical hook, and the disrepute rule exists for exactly this.

Tesco, Father Christmas’s Covid pass (2021): more than 5,000 complaints, not investigated

“This Christmas, Nothing’s Stopping Us” showed Santa presenting a vaccine passport at border control. Complainants said it was coercive and encouraged discrimination by vaccine status. The ASA assessed the complaints and declined to investigate on 2 December 2021, calling the scene “a humorous reference to international travel rules”. Lesson: volume is not a verdict. A coordinated campaign of complaints does not change the test.

Ryanair, Jab and Go (2020 to 2021): 2,370 complaints, upheld

Released in late 2020, the TV ad urged viewers to book summer holidays on the strength of the vaccine rollout. The ASA received 2,370 complaints, at the time the third highest ever, and ruled the ads irresponsible and misleading about who would be vaccinated by summer 2021. Lesson: the rare case where a mass complaint and a breach coincide, because the claim was factual and wrong.

Booking.com, Booking.yeah (2014 to 2016): thousands of complaints, not upheld

The campaign that used “booking” as a stand-in for a swear word drew 1,768 complaints in 2014 and a further 2,345 by the time the ASA rejected them all in February 2016. The ASA found the word was clearly enunciated, relevant to the brand, and unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence. Lesson: wordplay that references your own name is defensible. Actual profanity is not.

The Sun, win a date with a Page 3 model (2014): 1,711 complaints, upheld

News UK’s promotion offered a date with a Page 3 model as a prize. The ASA found it offensive and irresponsible for presenting women as objects to be won. Lesson: prizes are ads too, and the objectification rules apply to them.

KFC, singing with your mouth full (2005): 1,671 complaints, not upheld

Bartle Bogle Hegarty’s ad showed call-centre staff singing through a mouthful of Zinger Crunch Salad. Parents said it encouraged bad manners. The ASA rejected the complaints, reasoning that table manners are taught through constant reminders and one ad would not undo them. For nine years it was the most complained-about ad ever. Lesson: annoyance is not harm.

Moneysupermarket, Dave in heels (2015 to 2016): 1,513 complaints, not upheld

A man strutting down the street in denim shorts and heels topped the 2015 list with 1,513 complaints, and a follow-up with dance moves that some found “overtly sexual” topped 2016 with 1,063. None was upheld. The ASA has noted that a run of its most complained-about ads involved diversity and inclusion themes, and that in every case it judged the public would see the ads positively. Lesson: a loud minority does not define “widespread offence”.

The famous bans

Protein World, Are You Beach Body Ready? (2015): 380 complaints, banned for the wrong reason

The yellow London Underground poster became a lightning rod for body-image protest, with a petition and defaced posters across the network. The ASA received 380 complaints about offence and did not uphold them, concluding the ad was unlikely to cause serious or widespread offence. But before that decision it had already told Protein World the poster could not appear again in its current form because of concerns about its health and weight-loss claims. Lesson: the ad died on substantiation, not on taste. Check the claims before you fight the culture war.

Poundland, Elf Behaving Badly (2017 to 2018): 85 complaints, upheld

Poundland’s Christmas social posts showed a toy elf in a series of sexual scenarios, including one with a Twinings tea bag that prompted a complaint from Twinings itself. On 7 February 2018 the ASA upheld all 85 complaints, ruling the posts irresponsible and likely to cause serious or widespread offence because a children’s toy was sexualised on pages with no age gate. Poundland’s reply, issued in the elf’s voice, dismissed “84 people who had a sense of humour failure”. Lesson: double entendre plus a children’s toy plus an open feed equals a ban, and the joke will not save you.

Volkswagen and Philadelphia (2019): the first gender stereotype bans

The new rule against harmful gender stereotypes came into force on 14 June 2019 and the ASA used it for the first time on 14 August. Volkswagen’s eGolf ad showed men as astronauts and athletes while a woman sat by a pram; it drew three complaints and was upheld for contrasting stereotypical male and female roles. Mondelez’s Philadelphia ad, in which distracted fathers let a baby ride a conveyor belt and agree “let’s not tell mum”, drew 128 complaints and was upheld for implying men cannot care for children. Lesson: casting against type is not enough if the punchline restores the stereotype. Match.com found the same in October 2022, when a TikTok showing a woman’s daily chores for a passive boyfriend was upheld under CAP rule 4.9.

Paddy Power, again and again

The bookmaker’s blind footballers kicking a cat, first aired in 2010 and back in the ASA’s top ten for 2016 with 450 complaints, was never upheld; the ASA read the scenario as absurd. Its 2022 Wonder Wheel TV ad, in which a man distracted by a game insults his girlfriend’s mother before the line “you’ll always get another chance”, was upheld under BCAP rules 17.3.1 and 17.3.4 for portraying gambling as a priority over family and encouraging repeat play. Lesson: gambling ads are judged on behaviour depicted, not tone.

The one the ASA never banned: Iceland’s Rang-tan

In November 2018 Iceland submitted a version of Greenpeace’s animated Rang-tan film, about an orangutan displaced by palm oil plantations, as its Christmas TV ad. Clearcast declined to clear it. The reason was not offence or misleadingness: the BCAP Code, implementing the Communications Act 2003, bars ads inserted by or on behalf of bodies whose objects are wholly or mainly political, and the film had been made by Greenpeace. The ASA was never involved, because there was no ad on air to complain about. The film went viral online instead and Iceland’s “banned Christmas ad” became the season’s story. Lesson: “banned” headlines are marketing gold, but the mechanism was pre-clearance, not a ruling, and it turned on who made the film rather than what it said.

Christmas ads and the complaint machine

Sainsbury’s 1914 truce film drew 823 complaints in 2014 for using the First World War to sell groceries; not upheld. KFC’s twerking chicken topped 2017 with 755 complaints from viewers who found it disrespectful to chickens; not upheld, per the ASA’s 2017 list. The same year McDonald’s pulled its Filet-O-Fish grief ad and Dove withdrew a breastfeeding ad before either could be investigated. Match.com’s 2016 ad of two women kissing drew 810 complaints and was cleared. The pattern holds: festive and inclusive ads attract volume, and volume rarely converts.

The modern bans: green claims, gambling and HFSS

Green claims

Tesco’s Plant Chef campaign was upheld in June 2022 after 171 complaints because Tesco had no lifecycle evidence that its specific burgers were “better for the planet”. Toyota’s Born to Roam SUV campaign was upheld in November 2023 under the social responsibility rule for showing driving across natural ecosystems without regard to impact. On 24 June 2026 Uniqlo, Adidas and Calvin Klein all lost over paid-search claims like “Recycled Materials” that implied products were entirely recycled. Nike’s “Sustainable Materials” search ad went the same way in December 2025. Lesson: an unqualified environmental word is an absolute claim, and absolute claims need absolute evidence.

Gambling

Ladbrokes was upheld in August 2023 for promoted tweets featuring Djokovic, Nadal, Kyrgios and Tsitsipas, players the ASA judged of strong appeal to under-18s under CAP rule 16.3.12. On 12 August 2026 Midnite lost across TV, VOD and radio after 125 complaints about ads that stacked up everyday frustrations before presenting its app as the one thing that works; the ASA found this implied gambling relieves stress. Lesson: the two tests now are who appears and what the story implies.

HFSS

Paid online ads for identifiable less healthy products have been prohibited under CAP rule 15.19 since 5 January 2026, with a 9pm TV watershed alongside. The first upheld rulings came on 8 July 2026 against Mars, whose oval yellow character identified Peanut M&M’s, and a Morley’s franchisee’s meal-deal post. Domino’s lost on 22 July after giving clearance bodies wrong nutrient data, and YO! Sushi on 12 August for naming a KitKat cream puff in the copy. KFC, Popeyes and Thorntons were cleared because their products either were not HFSS or were not identifiable. Lesson: the brand exemption is real, and it collapses the moment a specific product is named or drawn.

How brands should respond to a ruling

• Engage during the investigation. Non-response is recorded under rule 1.7 and published.
• Amend rather than argue. Most upheld rulings specify the exact change required, and an amended ad can run.
• Use the independent review if a ruling is genuinely wrong, but expect the ASA to stand by decisions on substantiation.
• Do not lean into the “banned” headline unless the ad was cleared on the facts. Poundland’s elf reply aged badly; Iceland’s did not, because nothing it said had been found misleading.
• Comply, because the sanctions escalate: ad alerts, paid-search takedowns, pre-vetting and referral to Trading Standards.

FAQs

What is the most complained-about advert in UK history?

Paddy Power’s 2014 Oscar Pistorius ad, with 5,525 complaints, all upheld. Tesco’s 2021 Christmas ad drew more than 5,000 and was cleared.

Does the ASA actually ban adverts?

It rules that an ad must not appear again in the form complained of. Advertisers almost always comply; if they do not, CAP sanctions and referral to statutory bodies follow.

Was Iceland’s Rang-tan ad banned by the ASA?

No. Clearcast declined to clear it for TV under the political advertising rules because it was made by Greenpeace. The ASA never ruled on it.

Do lots of complaints mean an ad will be banned?

No. Most of the ASA’s annual most-complained-about lists contain no upheld rulings. A single complaint about a misleading price is more likely to succeed than a thousand about taste.

Can a TV ad be banned after Clearcast approved it?

Yes. Philadelphia, Paddy Power’s Wonder Wheel and Midnite were all cleared and later upheld.

Sources

• ASA: Our history; 2014, 2015, 2016 and 2017 most complained-about ads; Sanctions.
• ASA rulings: Tesco Stores Ltd (8 June 2022); PPB Counterparty Services Ltd t/a Paddy Power (15 June 2022); Match.com International Ltd (5 October 2022); LC International Ltd t/a Ladbrokes (9 August 2023); Toyota (GB) plc (22 November 2023); Nike Retail BV (25 September 2024 and 3 December 2025); Uniqlo, Adidas and Calvin Klein (24 June 2026); Mars Wrigley and S&E1 Ltd t/a Morley’s Woking (8 July 2026); KFC (8 July 2026); Domino’s (22 July 2026); YO! Sushi and Dribble Media t/a Midnite (12 August 2026); Ferrero t/a Thorntons (19 August 2026); PLK Chicken t/a Popeyes (2 September 2026).
• Retail Gazette, 7 February 2018 and 2 December 2021. Travolution, 23 February 2016. National Law Review on the 2019 gender stereotype rulings. Campaign, Christmas ads 2018. NBC News, 1 June 2005, on the KFC ruling. Wikipedia entries for Paddy Power, Ryanair, Poundland and Iceland (supermarket), used only to confirm dates and cross-check figures.