ASA cracks down on law firms over misleading marketing

On 24th September 2025, the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has upheld complaints against three law firms for misleading websites and online marketing, as part of a broader investigation into group litigation advertising. The decisions serve as a reminder to litigation law firms on the need for clarity and prominence of key information when it comes to marketing, particularly around fees and compensation value, to enable consumers to make informed decisions about legal services.

The regulator found that key information about fees and costs was buried or unclear, while some adverts made unsubstantiated promises of compensation. The rulings highlight growing concern about what the executive director of Fair Civil Justice, Seema Kennedy OBE, described as a “predatory claims culture” in the UK, where the liabilities and expenses of litigation are downplayed in favour of ‘no risk’, ‘easy money’ messaging.

JLG Legal Ltd t/a Johnson Law Group

The ASA ruled that JLG’s advertising – on Google paid-for search, paid-for Facebook ad and website – relating to group action compensation claims by diesel vehicle owners and lessees, misled consumers by hiding key details about fees and potential liabilities.

Visitors were asked to ‘e-sign’ for claim checks were in fact entering into contracts, without this being made clear. The firm was also told not to promote specific compensation figures unless they could be fully substantiated and explained, including deductions.

KP Law Ltd

KP Law’s marketing in relation to harmful talc and baby powder claims against Johnson & Johnson, was handled through a lead generator brand - ‘Join The Claim’. ASA found that they hadfailed to provide transparent information about costs early enough into the process. It also gave the impression that Join The Claim was itself a law firm or worked with multiple firms, when in fact it was simply passing leads to KP Law. This lack of clarity was judged to breach advertising codes.

Jones Whyte Law Ltd t/a Jones Whyte

Complaints were upheld against Jones Whyte, a Glasgow-based full-service law firm, about their paid social media and website relating to group action compensation claims for people affected by a data breach.

 The firm ’ Facebook and landing page adverts did not present fees and other costs clearly or in a timely way, leaving consumers with a misleading impression of the true financial risks. The ASA emphasised that if firms used phrases like “no win, no fee” or “no upfront costs” in social media ads, they must be accompanied by prominent explanations of what those terms actually mean.

Implications for the sector

These rulings signpost growing scrutiny on legal marketing and expose the risks of treating complex legal issues with the kind of simplified, “easy money” messaging common in consumer advertising. When firms do not foreground important details or gloss over risks, the reputational fallout can be signficant. The ASA’s decisions show that a lack of transparency not only breaches regulatory standards but also risks making firms appear as though they are exploiting consumers’ limited legal knowledge. For a profession built on trust, that is especially damaging.

Key points of guidance

1. Be clear and transparent about costs - clearly explain all deductions, fees, and potential liabilities at the earliest stage. Don’t obscure them in small print.
2. Highlight risks in adverts - if you use social media and/or paid for ads, signpost key risks and costs there, not just on less prominent website pages.
3. Avoid exaggerated claims - only quote compensation figures if you can substantiate them and explain the calculation.
4. Use plain English - consumers are likely to misinterpret legal terms if presented without context, so replace jargon with straightforward language.
5. Review lead generation partnerships - ensure that third-party marketeers are transparent about their role and comply with the same regulatory obligations placed as your firm.

The ASA’s crackdown is a reminder that legal services cannot be marketed just like they are consumer products. Effective legal marketing is built on trust between firms and clients, with transparency and clear communication forming the foundation.

Persuasive ads may attract attention, but without compliance with ASA rules, they risk appearing exploitative and damaging a firm’s reputation. In an industry facing growing regulatory scrutiny, transparency remains the strongest way for firms to stand apart.