Issuing body: Advertising Standards Authority (ASA)
Ruling reference: A25-1314465 Centre of CPD Excellence
Date of ruling: 18 March 2026
Outcome (in the regulator's terminology): Upheld on three issues
Number of complaints: 1
Complainant: The CPD Register Ltd
Direct link:
https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/centre-of-cpd-excellence-a25-1314465-centre-of-cpd-excellence.html — accessed 30 April 2026.
The ASA Council upheld three issues:
Claims in the "Compare CPD Companies" comparison table were misleading and not substantiated — breaching CAP Code rules 3.1 (Misleading advertising), 3.7 (Substantiation), 3.32 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors), and 3.39 (Price comparisons).
The comparison was not verifiable, in that the page did not direct the audience to information allowing them to check each element of the comparison or understand how figures were calculated — breaching CAP Code rule 3.34 (Comparisons with identifiable competitors).
Claims that the Centre of CPD Excellence had a "panel of specialists" and "independent industry experts", that its accreditation met "internationally recognised standards", and that it had a direct relationship with the listed insurance partners, were misleading and not substantiated — breaching CAP Code rules 3.1 and 3.7.
The ASA action statement records that the ad must not appear again in its current form and that the Centre of CPD Excellence was told to ensure future comparative claims and price comparisons are not misleading, are supported by documentary evidence, and can be verified by the audience; and not to make claims about panels of specialists, independent industry experts, accreditation against internationally recognised standards, or imply official relationships with insurance partners unless they hold adequate documentary evidence to substantiate those claims.
Readers are directed to the ASA's published decision as the authoritative source. The CPD Register does not characterise, summarise or interpret the substance of the ruling beyond the regulator's own terminology.
Note on third-party reference within the ruling: The ruling records that the Centre of CPD Excellence's "Compare CPD Companies" comparison table included the criterion "Approved by the CPD Regulatory Office". The CPD Regulatory Office is itself the subject of an upheld ASA ruling (A24-1247544,
https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/cpd-regulatory-office-a24-1247544-cpd-regulatory-office.html), in which the ASA upheld claims that the CPD Regulatory Office had misleadingly implied a working relationship with government bodies. We record this link factually because reliance on a third-party "approval" that has itself been the subject of an upheld misleading-advertising ruling is materially relevant to the Centre of CPD Excellence's comparative claim.
This finding is consistent with our previous note in The CPD Accreditation Service (The CPD Register, updated 1 September 2025) regarding the CPD Regulatory Office ruling, and updates our published record on the Centre of CPD Excellence to reflect the new directly-applicable ruling of 18 March 2026.