Of everything described on this site, the advertising rules are the part where an ordinary reader has the most power and uses it the least. Complaining is free, takes a few minutes, requires no legal knowledge, and produces published outcomes that constrain everybody else in the sector.
What applies
Marketing communications in the United Kingdom are subject to the advertising codes written by the Committee of Advertising Practice and administered by the Advertising Standards Authority. For a clinic's website, social media, leaflets, emails and paid advertising, the relevant one is the CAP Code.
Note the scope: a clinic's own website and its social media posts are marketing communications. This surprises people who assume the rules cover paid advertising only.
The misleading standard, which is the important one
Marketing must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. The assessment is of the overall impression created by the communication, taking account of what is implied as well as what is stated, and of material information that is omitted.
This is the point that changes how you read everything. An advertisement can consist entirely of true sentences and still be misleading, if the impression it leaves is not accurate. A selected before and after pair, a percentage without its qualifications, a from price for one session of a course, and a regulatory-sounding phrase with no regulator behind it are each capable of creating a misleading impression without any individual falsehood.
We take those apart in reading a before and after, where the percentages come from and the regulatory sounding phrases.
“Every claim in our advertising is technically accurate, so it complies.”
What would have to be true
- That compliance is assessed sentence by sentence rather than by the impression a marketing communication creates as a whole.
- That omissions and implications are outside the scope of the assessment.
What is actually established
- The Code assesses the overall impression created by a marketing communication, including what is implied and what is left out.
- An advertisement composed entirely of literally true statements can still be found misleading.
- Substantiation must be held before a claim is made, not assembled after a complaint.
Technical accuracy is not the test. This is the single most useful thing for a reader to know, because it explains why an advertisement that contains no false sentence can still be a problem, and it is the basis on which most complaints in this sector succeed or fail.
Substantiation
Claims capable of objective substantiation must be supported by adequate evidence, and the advertiser must hold that evidence before making the claim. Assembling a justification after a complaint is not compliance.
Two practical consequences. First, asking a clinic what evidence they hold for a specific claim is a reasonable question, and their ability to answer tells you something. Second, the level of evidence required relates to the claim being made: a modest claim needs less than a strong one, and a claim about a health outcome is held to a higher standard than a claim about appearance.
Social responsibility and appearance
Marketing must be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society. In this sector, that engages several things: the exploitation of insecurity about appearance, the presentation of normal bodily features as defects requiring correction, the targeting of people at moments of low resilience, and the trivialisation of procedures that carry clinical risk.
These are areas where the ASA has taken an interest in the cosmetic sector, and the published rulings are the place to see how the standard is applied rather than described. We would encourage anybody considering a treatment to read half a dozen rulings in this sector first. It takes twenty minutes and it changes how the marketing reads.
Prescription only medicines
Advertising a prescription only medicine to the public is restricted in the United Kingdom under the medicines framework, separately from the advertising code. This is why marketing for injectable treatments tends to describe effects rather than name substances.
Where you see a prescription only medicine named in material aimed at the public, that is a matter for the MHRA as well as potentially for the ASA.
What a body treatment advertisement should not be doing
- Creating an impression of typical results that is not typical, including through selected before and after images.
- Making a claim capable of substantiation without holding the evidence for it in advance.
- Naming a prescription only medicine in material directed at the public.
- Exploiting insecurity about appearance, or suggesting that a normal feature of a body is a defect.
- Trivialising a procedure that carries clinical risk, including through same-day offers and pressure to book.
- Presenting a price in a way that conceals what is necessarily required in addition.
You do not need to establish which rule applies in order to complain. Describe what you saw and why it gave you a misleading impression. The ASA works out the rest.
How to complain, in practice
Save the evidence first. Screenshot the advertisement, including the date and where you saw it. Claims are frequently removed once questioned, and an undated recollection is much harder to assess than a saved image.
Describe the impression. You do not need to identify which rule applies. Write two or three sentences saying what the advertisement led you to believe and why you think that impression is not accurate. That is the complaint.
Submit it. The ASA takes complaints free through its website. One complaint is enough to trigger consideration; a case does not require a campaign.
What happens next. Most matters are resolved informally, with the advertiser amending or removing the claim. Where the ASA investigates formally, it publishes a ruling naming the advertiser and setting out the finding. Those rulings are what everybody else in the sector reads.
The other routes, briefly
Misleading pricing, pressure selling and unfair commercial practices are matters for Trading Standards, reached through Citizens Advice. Problems with a device or a medicine go to the MHRA Yellow Card scheme. Conduct by a registered healthcare professional is a matter for their regulator. Poor service is a Consumer Rights Act 2015 question.
We set all of these out in order in what to do if a treatment goes wrong.
Why it is worth doing
Because it works, and because nobody else is doing it. Every published ruling in this sector exists because one person filled in a form. In an area with no licensing scheme in force, the advertising rules are the most active constraint on how these treatments are sold, and they are enforced almost entirely on the initiative of the public.