The UK Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) published a ruling on November 19 2025 that bans a set of misleading hotel‑room‑pricing ads from Booking.com, Accor, Travelodge and Hilton. The decision follows a review of several “from” price claims that overstated the availability of the lowest‑priced rooms across a range of dates.
Booking.com’s banned ad read “easyHotel Sheffield City Centre From £28” and was first seen on May 6 2025. The ASA found that the platform could not demonstrate that a significant proportion of rooms were available at that price on multiple dates, citing only seven bookings at the advertised rate in May. Booking.com argued that Google’s dynamic ad feed selected dates and prices, but the ASA held that advertisers are responsible for substantiating “from” claims regardless of the platform used.
Accor’s ad, “ibis budget Birmingham Centre from £27,” was shown only for a single night on July 30 2025. The ASA concluded that the claim did not reflect a meaningful availability of rooms at that price across a broader date range.
Travelodge’s two banned ads—“Travelodge Nottingham Riverside From £25” and “Travelodge Swansea M4 From £21”—were each available for only one night on May 18 2025. The ASA found the evidence insufficient to support the advertised price as a typical or representative rate.
Hilton’s ads, “Hampton by Hilton Hamilton Park From £68” and “Hampton by Hilton Newcastle From £59,” were displayed on April 11 2025. Hilton cited a technical error and provided historical availability data, but the ASA determined that the data did not prove a significant proportion of rooms were available at those prices.
The ASA’s ruling is grounded in the CAP Code’s requirement that “from” price claims must be backed by evidence of a substantial number of rooms available at the advertised rate across a reasonable range of dates. The decision underscores that dynamic pricing mechanisms, such as those employed by Google, do not absolve advertisers from providing accurate availability data.
The immediate consequence of the ruling is a ban on the specific ads in their current form. While the ASA did not impose fines in this instance, it warned that repeated or severe breaches could lead to regulatory penalties and mandatory corrective advertising.
Booking.com’s spokesperson said the company had provided booking data to the ASA and that it relied on Google’s dynamic ad feed to select dates and prices. Hilton’s representative acknowledged a technical glitch but maintained that the data showed availability. Accor and Travelodge also supplied data, but the ASA found it insufficient to substantiate the “from” claims.
The ban may erode consumer trust in the affected brands and could impact booking volumes as customers question the reliability of advertised rates. The ruling also signals heightened regulatory scrutiny of online travel advertising practices, prompting the companies to review and tighten their ad‑substance verification processes.
Booking.com has faced prior regulatory scrutiny, including a Dutch investigation over “free cancellation” claims in 2018 and a 2020 fine from the Hungarian Competition Authority for misleading advertising. The ASA’s use of an AI‑driven active ad‑monitoring system reflects a broader industry push to enforce advertising standards in the digital space.
In sum, the ASA ruling highlights the importance of accurate, substantiated “from” price claims in hotel advertising. The affected companies must adjust their advertising practices to comply with the CAP Code and avoid future regulatory action.
The content on BeyondSPX is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as financial or investment advice. We are not financial advisors. Consult with a qualified professional before making any investment decisions. Any actions you take based on information from this site are solely at your own risk.