ASA Upholds Complaint Against Optival Over Self-Exclusion Search Ad

The Advertising Standards Authority published a ruling on October 28, 2026, upholding a complaint against Optival Ltd, trading as bestbookiesandbettingsites.co.uk, over a paid search ad promoting betting sites that appeared following a search for “self exclusion bookies”. The regulator found the ad breached the social responsibility rule of the CAP Code, the UK Code of Non-broadcast Advertising and Direct & Promotional Marketing.

The Ad and the Complaint

The ASA categorised the case under paid search advertising and recorded the outcome as Upheld. The ad, for the bestbookiesandbettingsites.co.uk website, was seen on August 10, 2026, after a user entered the search “self exclusion bookies”. It promoted UK betting sites and the bonus offers available to customers opening new betting accounts.

The ruling records the ad’s text in full:

“Top 15 Betting Sites UK – Compare the Best UK Bookmakers … Claim your Exclusive First Bet Bonus for your Next UK Betting Account. Discover the Best Welcome Bonus Offers by UK’s Top Online Sports Betting Brands for 2025!”

One complainant challenged whether the ad was irresponsibly targeted. The ASA recorded a single complaint, listed no confirmed agency behind the ad, and gave Optival Ltd’s address as 132a St. Pauls Road, London.

Optival’s Response

Optival stated that it had never targeted the phrase “self exclusion bookies”. The company said that, on receiving the complaint, it conducted a full review of its search term reports and found no record of search terms containing the phrase “self exclusion” causing its ads to be shown. It provided a screenshot of a search term report from its Google Ads account to demonstrate that no matching search terms were found across all of its campaigns.

The company said it maintained dedicated negative keyword lists designed to block searches relating to self-exclusion, GamStop and problem gambling. Because the ad seen by the complainant was not identified in its search term reports, Optival said it believed this was an isolated incident that fell below the platform’s reporting thresholds, resulting from the platform’s automated query matching rather than from any keywords it had targeted. The company said it would further strengthen its safeguards by expanding its negative keyword exclusions so that all current and future campaigns would automatically be prevented from appearing against searches related to self-exclusion and similar terms.

The ASA’s Assessment

The ASA upheld the complaint. It considered that, by searching for the phrase “self exclusion bookies”, a consumer was likely to be seeking information, advice and support about how to prevent their exposure to gambling services. Such consumers, in the regulator’s view, were likely to include vulnerable people looking to manage or reduce their exposure to and engagement with gambling ads. In that context, the ASA considered an ad promoting online betting sites and offering welcome bonuses was not appropriate to appear in response to that search.

The ASA noted that bestbookiesandbettingsites.co.uk operated an affiliate comparison website rather than a gambling service itself, but considered the ad had the effect of promoting online betting sites and bookmakers. It noted that the CAP Code requires ads for gambling to have particular regard to the need to protect vulnerable persons from being harmed or exploited. The regulator said it expected marketers placing ads for gambling-related services to have extremely robust controls in place to prevent their ads from being inappropriately targeted, because of the potential for considerable harm to vulnerable consumers.

The regulator acknowledged the company’s negative keyword lists and welcomed its assurance that it would expand them. However, it considered that robust measures should already have been in place given the potential for consumer harm. Because the ad appeared in response to a search term clearly indicating a consumer seeking to reduce their exposure to gambling content, the ASA considered that, at the time the ad was seen, the company’s targeting controls had not been sufficiently robust to prevent the ad from being shown to potentially vulnerable consumers. It concluded there was a strong likelihood that vulnerable consumers seeking to self-exclude from, or reduce their exposure to, gambling services and ads had been served the ad, and that the ad had not been responsibly targeted.

The ASA found the ad breached rule 1.3 of the CAP Code (Edition 12), the Code’s social responsibility rule. Rule 1.3, which sits in the Code’s general section, states: “Marketing communications must be prepared with a sense of responsibility to consumers and to society.”

Related Rulings and the Required Action

The ruling page lists three related gambling rulings: HRY Games, upheld on October 14, 2026; Dribble Media Ltd, upheld on September 16, 2026; and White Hat Gaming Ltd, not upheld on September 16, 2026.

The ASA directed that the ad must not be served following the search “self exclusion bookies” again, and told Optival Ltd to ensure that its search ads are responsibly targeted.