The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has ruled that major high street retailers John Lewis, Boots, and Debenhams misled customers with their Black Friday promotions last year. The advertising watchdog found that advertisements for laptops, home products, and fragrances overstated the price reductions, failing to provide sufficient evidence that the discounts represented genuine savings.
ASA Findings on John Lewis
Two John Lewis advertisements for MacBook and ASUS laptops were found to have overstated the advertised price reductions. For example, a MacBook Air offered at £699 with a claimed £150 saving was problematic, as the ASA noted insufficient data to prove its established selling price was £849. Third-party trackers indicated the laptop had only been sold at £849 for a single day in July 2025. Similarly, a purported £450 price drop for an ASUS laptop during John Lewis’s Black Friday event lacked sufficient evidence to demonstrate a genuine saving.
Debenhams and Boots Under Scrutiny
Debenhams faced scrutiny for two ads, one claiming 44 per cent savings on home products and another featuring 21 per cent savings on various items, including a hair styling tool, both deemed misleading. Boots advertised a Hugo Boss fragrance reduced from £80 to £60, but the ASA discovered it had only been sold at the higher price for 21 days when it was initially launched.
In all instances, the ASA concluded it had not seen evidence that the advertised Black Friday deals represented a genuine saving against the product’s usual selling price, thereby misleading consumers.
Regulator's Use of AI-Powered Monitoring
The sweep is the latest by the regulator using AI-powered monitoring, and follows rulings against hotel and travel companies in November for making misleading “from” price claims. The ASA also banned two ads for Very following complaints from the watchdog Which? over misleading reference prices and associated savings.
Statements from ASA and Which?
Emily Henwood, operations manager at the ASA, said: “People rightly expect the deals they see around Black Friday to be genuine. These rulings send a clear message to retailers and brands that promotional events aren’t exempt from the rules. We expect advertisers to be able to demonstrate that the discounts they promote represent real savings so that people aren’t misled.”
Which? head of consumer protection policy Sue Davies said: “It’s unacceptable that well-known businesses have been reeling in customers with misleading deals. It will be reassuring to people, especially when so many are already struggling with cost-of-living pressures, that the ASA is taking action. This should send a message to other businesses that dodgy pricing will not be tolerated. That being said, we find too often that customers are being targeted by ‘deals’ that are not what they seem. It’s clear that the current system is not fit for purpose and the Government must tighten the law to ban deceptive pricing.”
Retailer Responses
A Debenhams spokesman said: “We note the ASA’s ruling in relation to a small number of marketplace product adverts from late 2025. Debenhams operates a marketplace model, where third-party sellers set their own prices and are required to comply with all advertising and pricing regulations. While we do not set or control this pricing, we have taken steps to reinforce our guidance and requirements for third-party sellers to ensure compliance with all advertising and pricing regulations.”
A John Lewis spokeswoman said: “Our Never Knowingly Undersold price promise means we lower thousands of prices each week to match competitors – and this activity intensifies during the busy Black Friday period. While we always strive to ensure the price claims in our advertising are accurate and compliant, we apologise for two errors which weren’t picked up when we lowered our prices to match others.”
A Boots spokeswoman said: “We know that our customers enjoy making genuine savings on their shopping at Boots, and last year we offered discounts on more than 20,000 products across the Black Friday period. We have robust measures in place to make sure that our promotions comply with the relevant laws and associated guidance, and we have taken learnings from this individual case of human error identified by the ASA.”
