Category: Nexis Newswire

New York, NY – September 1, 2026 – In a challenge brought by Owlet Baby Care, Inc., BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division recommended that Udisense, Inc. (Nanit) discontinue or modify certain popularity, superiority, health and safety, “smartest,” and parental sleep claims for its Nanit Smart Video Baby Monitor. The National Advertising Division (NAD), however, found that certain wellness claims did not convey unsupported messages.

Owlet and Nanit market baby monitor products that provide parents with real-time data on their children’s sleep through various information-gathering functions. Owlet challenged express and implied claims made by Nanit on its website, sponsored Google search results, and on social media platforms, including sponsored influencer content and re-posted user-generated content.

“Most Loved” / “#1 Most Loved” / “Internet’s Favorite” Claims

Owlet challenged Nanit advertising on its website and social media channels claiming that Nanit products are the “most loved”/“#1 most loved” and “internet’s favorite” baby monitors. NAD evaluated Nanit’s reliance on Amazon reviews to support these popularity claims and determined that Nanit did not show that Amazon reviews are representative of the marketplace as a whole.

Accordingly, NAD determined that the challenged “most loved,” “#1 most loved,” and “internet’s favorite” claims were not supported and recommended that they should be discontinued.

“Most Awarded” Claims

Nanit claimed to be the “most awarded” baby monitor. Given the undefined nature of awards and Nanit’s reliance on awards from third parties with potentially varying standards and rigor, NAD recommended that the “most awarded” claims be discontinued.

“Smartest Baby Monitor” Claims

NAD evaluated claims where Nanit promoted its device as the “smartest baby monitor” on the market. In assessing whether Nanit’s proprietary tracking capabilities, algorithmic insights, and artificial intelligence features justified a comparative superiority message over competing smart monitors, NAD found that Nanit failed to provide adequate substantiation for why its monitor system is the “smartest”.

Accordingly, NAD recommended that Nanit discontinue its “smartest baby monitor” claims.

Safety Claims and SIDS Implied Claims

At issue for NAD was user-generated and brand social media posts depicting infants sleeping on their stomachs while using the Nanit monitor with accompanying text such as “If it wasn’t for the… @get_nanit…, face down tummy sleeping would have my mom anxiety through the roof.” NAD found that the context of the posts, coupled with statements suggesting relief from anxiety about “tummy sleeping” or inviting parents to “choose your sleeper,” may convey a broader safety message that the Nanit device can prevent harmful stomach-sleeping risks, such as, such as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS).

Therefore, NAD recommended that Nanit discontinue the express claim “If it wasn’t for the… @get_nanit…, face down tummy sleeping would have my mom anxiety through the roof” and any implied claim about SIDS prevention, or modify its advertising to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure to avoid communicating the message that the product can eliminate harmful stomach sleeping risks, like SIDS.

Alerts and Nursery Environment Claims

Owlet challenged claims suggesting the Nanit monitor protects infants or provides complete nursery safety through automated notifications. NAD noted that while the device provides information and alerts to inform caregiving decisions, it does not protect infants from all harmful conditions or offer foolproof detection.

Accordingly, NAD recommended that Nanit discontinue the claim that “Nanit alerts me if anything is wrong” and any implied claim about foolproof detection for all aspects of health, or modify it to more clearly indicate which kinds of alerts Nanit provides.

Additionally, NAD recommended that Nanit discontinue the “keeps a safe environment for your kiddos” claim or modify it to more clearly indicate that the claim refers specifically to temperature and humidity level alerts. NAD further recommended that any implied claim about foolproof detection for all aspects of infant’s health be discontinued or modified to clearly indicate the kinds of alerts Nanit provides.

Wellness Claims

Owlet challenged two wellness claims appearing in the description on Nanit’s website: (1) “Get a total view of baby’s wellness,” and (2) “Nanit lets parents track the health, wellness, and development of their baby.” Wellness is a broad term, but in the challenged instances, it is presented in a limited context tied to what Nanit offers with its devices. NAD determined that, in the context presented, no message of complete health and wellness in their broadest senses is conveyed.

Parental Sleep Claims

NAD reviewed claims in Nanit’s marketing promising quantified sleep benefits for parents, including assertions that using the monitor allows parents to get extra rest. NAD found that the evidence presented in the record did not sufficiently link infant sleep to parental sleep and was not a good fit for specific and quantified parental sleep claims.

Therefore, NAD recommended that Nanit discontinue the claims that Nanit parents get an extra “36 nights of sleep per year” and that parents who use Nanit “may get more sleep.”

Nothing in this decision precludes Nanit from making other truthful and non-misleading claims about its products’ “smart” features, the potential sleep benefits of using its products, or its consumer reviews on Amazon or other platforms.

During the proceeding, Nanit voluntarily and permanently discontinued express claims that “Nanit saved our baby’s life a number of times,” as well as claims that Nanit tracks a baby’s heart rate. NAD will treat the discontinued claims, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.

In its advertiser statement, Nanit stated that it “respectfully disagrees with” aspects of the decision, it “agrees to comply with NAD’s recommendations”.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than 20 globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create fair competition for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and creating fair competition for business.

New York, NY – August 31, 2026 – In a challenge brought by Abbott Laboratories, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Kendal Nutricare Limited provided support for certain claims about the use of whole milk in its Kendamil infant formula. However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that Kendal modify or discontinue claims regarding the product’s nutritional benefits, ingredients, and heritage.

Abbott challenged Kendamil infant formula claims found on Kendamil packaging, its website, as well as digital advertising claims regarding whole milk, breast milk comparisons, human milk oligosaccharides (HMOs), and brand heritage.

Whole Milk Claims

NAD determined that Kendal substantiated its ingredient claims regarding the use of whole milk, finding that whole milk serves as a primary ingredient and contributes naturally occurring milk fat to the formula.

However, NAD found that claims that competing formulas lose “natural milk fats and important nutrients” reasonably conveys that competing formulas are nutritionally inferior. As the record did not establish this or that infants receive superior nutritional benefits from Kendamil, NAD recommended that Kendal discontinue the claim, “Creamy whole milk from European grass-fed cows, sourced from family farms. No skimming, no shortcuts, and no unnecessary ingredients.”

Breast Milk Claims

NAD determined that while the record supports qualified statements concerning compositional similarities between whole milk fat and breast milk, the evidence did not establish that those similarities result in comparative nutritional benefits.

Accordingly, NAD recommended that Kendal discontinue claims that Kendamil’s use of whole milk keeps natural fats closer to breast milk, it provides “natural milk fat instead of relying on vegetable oils,” and “We source creamy European whole milk from grass-fed cows, raised on family farms. No skimming, no shortcuts, just pure, natural whole milk fats…the way nature intended.”

NAD also recommended that Kendal modify or discontinue its milk-fat comparison graphics because they did not accurately reflect the composition of Kendamil or competing formulas.

HMO Claims

NAD determined that Kendal’s advertising reasonably conveyed that Kendamil’s specific blend of HMOs (3′-GL, 4′-GL, and 6′-GL) helps support immune health and that the blend is unique. However, NAD determined that Kendal’s evidence was not a good fit for these product-specific claims.

Accordingly, NAD recommended that Kendal discontinue claims that its HMO blend supports immune health.

Heritage Claims

NAD determined that consumers are reasonably likely to understand unqualified heritage claims including “Est. 1962” and “60 years of experience” as communicating that the Kendamil brand or formula itself has existed continuously since 1962.

Therefore, NAD recommended that Kendal discontinue or modify these heritage claims to clearly communicate that references such as “Est. 1962” and “60 years of experience” refer to the manufacturing facility or production heritage, rather than the age of the Kendamil brand or formula itself.

During the inquiry, Kendal permanently discontinued the challenged exclusivity claim. NAD will treat the discontinued claim, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended it be discontinued.

In its advertiser statement, Kendal stated it will “comply with NAD’s recommendations.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than 20 globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create fair competition for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and creating fair competition for business.

New York, NY – August 24, 2026 – In a challenge brought by Kenvue Inc., BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Hims & Hers Health, Inc. provided a reasonable basis for its comparative efficacy claim. However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that it modify or discontinue other claims regarding doctor-trusted ingredients, dermatologist recommendations, safety and side effects.

Kenvue and Hims & Hers compete in the market for hair-loss and hair-regrowth treatments. Kenvue challenged express and implied claims made by Hims & Hers for compounded topical hair-loss products, including Hims Topical Finasteride & Minoxidil Spray, Hims Topical Finasteride & Minoxidil Serum, Hers Postmenopausal Hair Loss Spray, and Hers Hair Blends Postmeno Serum.

Kenvue challenged claims regarding doctor trust and dermatologist recommendations, comparative efficacy, safety, and side effects, as well as the adequacy of material risk disclosures.

Doctor-Trusted and Dermatologist-Recommended Claims

As support for the doctor-trusted claims, Hims provided confidential results of a survey of 250 independent dermatologists. NAD determined that the Hims survey was sufficient to support certain carefully qualified claims about the level of dermatologist trust reported for particular ingredients, ingredient combinations, and patient populations. However, NAD found that the survey results are not a good fit for the unqualified “doctor-trusted ingredients” claims presented in the challenged advertising.

NAD recommended that Hims & Hers modify its “doctor-trusted ingredients” claims to clearly and conspicuously disclose the relevant survey results, including the reported level of dermatologist trust for particular ingredients, ingredient combinations, and patient populations, or otherwise make the level of support clear.

Additionally, NAD determined that Hims’ dermatologist-trust survey is not a good fit to substantiate a dermatologist-recommended claim and recommended that Hims & Hers discontinue the claim “Hims Hair Hybrids contain a combination of dermatologist-recommended prescription ingredients.”

Comparative Efficacy Claim

NAD found that Hims & Hers had a reasonable basis for the claim, “Finasteride is doctor trusted to give even better results when paired with minoxidil, which helps to kickstart regrowth,” to the extent it conveys that finasteride provides better results when paired with minoxidil than when used alone. However, as there was no evidence that doctors trust finasteride for that reason, NAD recommended that the claim be modified to remove the “doctor trusted” language.

Safety and Side-Effect Claims

Hims represented it modified the claim “The product is a prescription medication used for the treatment of male pattern hair loss (androgenetic alopecia). It is a treatment alternative to oral finasteride that has been shown in research studies to be safe and effective,”  so that the “shown in research to be safe and effective” language refers to topical finasteride rather than the challenged product.

NAD recommended that Hims & Hers further modify the claim to clearly identify the subject of the research, the relevant limitations of the evidence, and the distinction between topical finasteride generally and the challenged compounded products to avoid conveying the message that the Hims Spray and Serum have been shown to be safe in clinical studies.

Additionally, NAD recommended that Hims & Hers modify claims identifying the products’ most common side effects to avoid conveying that local scalp reactions are the only material risks, or that the products’ material risks are primarily minor and local. Where necessary, Hims & Hers should clearly and conspicuously identify or direct consumers to material non-local risk categories in close proximity to the claim.

Hims & Hers modified a claim stating that systemic side effects associated with oral finasteride were “not reported” in the studies of topical finasteride,” to state that there have been “very limited reports” of such effects. NAD recommended that Hims further modify the claim to avoid implying that systemic side effects associated with finasteride are immaterial or not relevant to consumers considering topical finasteride products.

NAD further recommended that, to the extent Hims & Hers relies on specific side-effect disclosures to qualify product-benefit or safety claims, the disclosures appear clearly and conspicuously and in close proximity to the triggering claim.

During the proceeding, Hims & Hers permanently discontinued several efficacy, side-effect, and doctor-trusted claims appearing on legacy Hers Spray webpages. NAD will treat the discontinued claims, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.

In its advertiser statement, Hims & Hers Health, Inc. stated that it “voluntarily agrees to comply with NAD’s recommendations.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than 20 globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create fair competition for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and creating fair competition for business.

Expanded capabilities bring together LexisNexis authoritative intelligence, agents, skills, workflows, and AI models in one intuitive experience so legal professionals can accomplish more with AI

NEW YORK, August 24, 2026 – LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional today unveiled new agentic capabilities in Lexis+^® with Protégé, enabling legal professionals to move from first idea to review-ready work product in one intuitive AI experience.

Legal professionals simply describe what they want to accomplish, and Lexis+ with Protégé applies the right AI models – including LexisNexis models that build on years of model optimization expertise – along with appropriate agents, skills, and selected sources behind the scenes. It carries context forward from early exploration and strategy through research, analysis, drafting, and review, helping professionals produce trusted, well-structured work that is ready to review. Professionals no longer need to choose between separate AI experiences, repeatedly explain the same matter, or move across multiple tools to complete related work.

Lexis+ with Protégé combines the latest AI capabilities with authoritative LexisNexis content, customer documents, and organizational knowledge, Shepard’s^® citation intelligence, and enterprise-grade security and governance. The technology is sophisticated behind the scenes, but the experience is simple: professionals focus on the work, while Lexis+ with Protégé manages the AI.

One Intuitive Experience for Legal Work
Lexis+ with Protégé now enables legal professionals to:

• Create well-formatted, review-ready Microsoft Word, Excel, and PowerPoint outputs from one prompt that initiates multi-step drafting capabilities, with document-aware editing, structured tables, track changes, and suggested next steps.
• Carry context from one step to the next, reducing repeated instructions and helping each task build on the last.
• Use the right models and sources for each task, including LexisNexis models which will be previewed later this year. Lexis+ with Protégé applies the best-fit supported model by default while allowing professionals to select a preferred model. LexisNexis legal sources remain the default and primary grounding source for legal work, with web and customer sources available when selected.
• Verify legal authority within the experience through linked citations and Shepard’s citation intelligence.
• Connect to trusted organizational documents and personal work product as they draft. Professionals can search a connected document management system and select the materials Lexis+ with Protégé should use to draft high-quality work product.
• Apply specialized skills and preferred ways of working. Lexis+ with Protégé can use LexisNexis and ecosystem skills, with customer-created skills and workflows coming soon.

“Legal professionals should not have to spend their time managing AI, switching among tools or repeatedly explaining how they want work performed,” said Sean Fitzpatrick, CEO, LexisNexis Legal. “Lexis+ with Protégé brings together leading frontier and forthcoming LexisNexis AI models with authoritative legal intelligence, so legal professionals can work intuitively in one experience and receive well-structured, review-ready outputs grounded in sources they can trust.”

Unlike general-purpose AI and fixed legal applications, Lexis+ with Protégé unifies the intelligence, agents, skills, sources, and safeguards needed to produce trusted, review-ready legal work. Built on more than 150 years of attorney-curated content and more than 200 billion legal and business documents and records, Lexis+ with Protégé is developed by more than 4,000 technologists and legal subject matter experts and shaped with customers through the LexisNexis Customer Innovation Lab, preview programs, and ongoing feedback.

To learn more about Lexis+ with Protégé, visit www.lexisnexis.com/ai.

About LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional
LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional provides AI-powered legal, regulatory, business information, analytics, and workflows that help customers increase their productivity, improve decision-making, achieve better outcomes, and advance the rule of law around the world. As a digital pioneer, the company was the first to bring legal and business information online with its Lexis^® and Nexis^® services. LexisNexis Legal & Professional, which serves customers in more than 150 countries with 11,900 employees worldwide, is part of RELX, a global provider of information-based analytics and decision tools for professional and business customers.

New York, NY – August 20, 2026 – Following a BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division challenge brought by Reese Consumer Health, YYBA Corp. d/b/a Wellspring Meds voluntarily discontinued the challenged claims regarding PIN RID^®, a chewable pinworm treatment for humans.

Reese Consumer Health is a manufacturer and marketer of over-the-counter consumer healthcare products and dietary supplements. Wellspring Meds is an online retailer and marketer of over-the-counter medications, vitamins, supplements, and other consumer healthcare products sold through its direct-to-consumer website and online marketplaces.

Reese challenged claims made by Wellspring for its PIN RID^®, which appeared on the PIN RID^® website homepage and FAQ page.

During the inquiry, Wellspring Meds informed the National Advertising Division (NAD) that it had permanently discontinued all of the challenged claims. Therefore, NAD will treat the discontinued claims, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than 20 globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create fair competition for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and creating fair competition for business.

New York, NY – August 19, 2026 – In a challenge brought by BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division, SafelyYou Inc. was found to have supported certain claims for its SafelyYou Safety AI system but the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that other claims be modified or discontinued.

NAD reviewed claims concerning SafelyYou Safety AI, an AI-enabled fall detection and monitoring system for assisted living and memory care communities. The system is a computer vision and predictive care AI platform that uses machine learning, video analytics, and risk modeling to detect falls. The claims at issue included statements regarding fall detection accuracy, response times, false alarms, reductions in falls and fall-related emergency room visits, costs, care quality, and industry leadership.

NAD determined the evidence established a reasonable basis for the claims “On-site staff is alerted within seconds,” “Only one false alarm per sensor every two years,” and “SafelyYou Safety AI is proven to reduce falls by 40% and fall-related ER visits by a staggering 80% in the senior living communities we serve, saving costs for residents and families, and helping communities create safer environments and provide higher-quality care.”

NAD found that SafelyYou’s evidence supported the claim “Falls are detected with over 99% accuracy,” but recommended that SafelyYou modify the claim to disclose the basis for the claim, including that the claim is based on a single study.

NAD also found that SafelyYou’s evidence did not support the unqualified message conveyed by the claim “Proven to reduce falls, risk, and costs while elevating care.” NAD recommended that SafelyYou discontinue or modify the claim to avoid conveying the message that SafelyYou’s AI is “proven” to reduce falls, risk, and costs while elevating care, and to disclose the basis of support for the claim.

NAD determined that SafelyYou did not provide reliable comparative evidence supporting the superiority message conveyed by the claim “Get industry-leading capabilities and reliability.” Therefore, NAD recommended that SafelyYou discontinue the claim.

In its advertiser statement, SafelyYou stated it “will comply with NAD’s recommendations.”

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than 20 globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create fair competition for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and creating fair competition for business.

• Analysis of local authority data finds that 14.49 million people in England and Wales, or 23.4% of the population, live in an area classed as a legal aid desert
• Pattern of geographic inequality that mirrors wider regional disparities, with smaller, rural and coastal communities suffering the worst gaps.

LONDON, 18 August 2026 – LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional, a global leader in information, analytics and AI-powered legal workflow solutions, has published new research revealing that access to legal aid remains highly uneven across England and Wales.

The Legal Aid Deserts report uses the latest available public data to compare indicators of legal need with legal aid provider capacity. The analysis found that 91 local authorities are classed as legal aid deserts in at least one of the five areas analysed: housing, family, crime, immigration and employment. Together, these authorities are home to 14.49 million people, or 23.4% of the population of England and Wales.

37 local authorities, with a combined population of 5.38 million, fall into the lowest-scoring category in two or more areas. Eight local authorities are classed as legal deserts in four or more areas: Babergh, Breckland, Derbyshire Dales, East Cambridgeshire, East Devon, Rutland, South Norfolk and West Berkshire.

In practice, legal aid deserts are areas where there is a high need for legal support, but access to legal aid provision appears comparatively weak. For people living in these areas, the consequences can be severe: a tenant facing unlawful eviction with no solicitor, a parent navigating a custody dispute without representation, or a worker dismissed unfairly with no route to redress. For most, the alternative to legal aid is no legal help at all.

The report highlights significant pressure across individual areas of law. It found that 6.6 million people live in housing legal aid deserts, 4.2 million live in family legal aid deserts, 3.6 million live in crime legal aid deserts, 4.6 million live in immigration legal aid deserts, and 4.1 million live in employment legal aid deserts.

The findings suggest that the sharpest access gaps are often concentrated in smaller, rural, coastal and semi-rural authorities, where provider capacity appears limited relative to legal need. Regionally, the weakest-performing authorities are concentrated most heavily in the East of England, the East Midlands and parts of the South East, with further pressure points in the South West. London, by contrast, is largely absent from the most acute legal aid desert lists.

Commenting on the importance of accessible legal aid, Kirsty Brimelow KC, Chair of the Bar Council of England and Wales, said:

“Legal aid is a vital part of the justice system, meant to ensure that everyone receives the support they need to access justice, regardless of their financial situation. It provides equality of arms between parties trying to resolve their disputes and enables citizens to exercise their rights through the courts.”

“Legal aid deserts reduce access to good quality legal advice at the early stages of proceedings, which in turn causes poor case management decisions and delays to both the case and its resolution.”

Jasmine Basran, Head of Policy and Campaigns at the national homelessness charity Crisis, said:

“Being able to access housing legal aid can be the turning point that helps someone out of homelessness or helps them avoid it altogether. Early legal advice can stop an eviction becoming a homelessness application. Without it, problems that could have been resolved cheaply and early can spiral, forcing people into temporary accommodation at far greater cost to the person and to the public purse.”

“This report provides a critical update on legal aid across England and Wales. Even where housing legal aid exists, far too often it’s out of reach.”

Josh Giddens, Executive Sponsor of Rule of Law at LexisNexis, said:

“Four years on from our first analysis, many of the areas we identified as legal aid deserts in 2022 haven’t recovered.”

“Access to legal representation shouldn’t depend on where you live, how much you earn, or how far you can travel to find help. When that access doesn’t improve for years at a time, the Rule of Law itself is weaker for it and that gap becomes a pattern.”

Methodology

The analysis draws on public data on legal aid provider locations, population, local authority geography and area-specific indicators of legal need across housing, family, crime, immigration and employment. For each practice area, the model compares estimated legal need with local legal aid provider capacity, adjusts for population, and applies a 15 km catchment rule to reflect nearby access to support. Local authorities in the bottom 10% of the resulting access measure are classified as legal aid deserts.

About LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional

LexisNexis^® Legal & Professional provides AI-powered legal, regulatory, business information, analytics, and workflows that help customers increase their productivity, improve decision-making, achieve better outcomes, and advance the rule of law around the world. As a digital pioneer, the company was the first to bring legal and business information online with its Lexis^® and Nexis^® services. LexisNexis Legal & Professional, which serves customers in more than 150 countries with 11,900 employees worldwide, is part of RELX, a global provider of information-based analytics and decision tools for professional and business customers.

New York, NY – August 17, 2026 – Following a BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division challenge brought by The Procter & Gamble Company (P&G), Quanovate Tech, Inc. voluntarily discontinued claims for its Mira Fertility Monitor and Test Wands. 

P&G and Quanovate sell competing fertility monitors and wands. P&G challenged Quanovate’s comparative, performance, and superiority claims for its Mira Fertility Monitor and Test Wands.  

During the inquiry, Quanovate voluntarily agreed to permanently discontinue all of the challenged claims. NAD did not review the claims on their merits. The voluntarily discontinued claims will be treated, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued and Quanovate agreed to comply. 

In its advertiser statement, Quanovate stated it “respects the self-regulatory process and thanks NAD for its time.” 

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes. 

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than 20 globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create fair competition for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org. 

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and creating fair competition for business. 

New York, NY – August 13, 2026 – In a challenge brought by Dyson Inc., BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division recommended that Dreame Technology modify or discontinue advertising claims that its hair styling tools dry hair in two minutes to avoid conveying the unsupported message that the products can dry long hair in that time.

Fast-Track SWIFT is an expedited process designed for single-issue advertising cases before the National Advertising Division (NAD).

Dyson and Dreame offer competing hair stylers and hair dryers. At issue were claims for Dreame’s Dazzle Hair Styler and Miracle Pro Hair Dryer that the products can dry hair “in just 2 minutes,” which appeared on Dreame’s website and on Amazon, alongside images of models with long hair.

NAD found that one reasonable takeaway is that the two-minute drying claim applies to the long hair depicted in the images, even where the text refers to shoulder-length hair. NAD noted that visual elements can convey objective messages requiring substantiation.

NAD further found that pairing a quantified performance claim with imagery depicting materially different conditions – here, long hair versus shoulder-length hair – can communicate an unsupported message. As the advertising did not clearly limit the two-minute claim to shoulder-length hair, consumers may reasonably take away that similar results apply to longer hair.

NAD also determined that disclosures in the advertising did not remedy the misleading message. NAD noted that disclosures cannot contradict or correct a message reasonably conveyed by the main claim and imagery, and in this case, the disclosures did not clearly address drying time for long hair.

Accordingly, NAD recommended that Dreame discontinue the challenged claims or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the message that the Dazzle Hair Styler and Miracle Pro Hair Dryer can dry long hair in two minutes.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. Per NAD/NARB Procedures, this release may not be used for promotional purposes.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than 20 globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create fair competition for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division (NAD) of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. NAD reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to consumers and creating fair competition for business.