New York, NY – October 1, 2026 – Following a challenge brought by Charter Communications, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that T-Mobile US, Inc. provided support for certain comparative claims regarding T-Mobile Fiber (T-Fiber). However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim “Break free from big cable contracts.”
Charter and T-Mobile compete in the home internet market, with Charter offering residential service under the Spectrum brand via hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) and fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) networks, and T-Mobile offering FTTH through T-Fiber.
Traditional Cable Internet
Spectrum argued that T-Mobile’s advertising expressly contrasts fiber internet with “traditional cable internet” and that T-Mobile’s use of the phrase “cable internet” in the challenged advertising reasonably encompasses internet service offered over modern HFC networks by cable providers such as Spectrum.
NAD determined that the challenged advertising expressly frames the comparison as one between T-Fiber or fiber technology and traditional cable internet, which refers to services that employ hybrid fiber coaxial.
Speed Claims
Spectrum challenged claims that T-Fiber provides “up to gigabit upload and download speeds,” while cable internet has “uploads slower than downloads,” and that “cable internet often has slower upload speeds,” and “with fiber internet, you get significantly more uploading power than with most cable internet options.”
NAD determined that the speed comparison claims are supported as qualified descriptions of traditional cable internet generally and that the claim that fiber provides “significantly more uploading power than most cable internet options” is supported by the evidence regarding the prevalence of asymmetrical cable tiers and the limited availability of symmetrical upgraded HFC service.
Latency Claims
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber provides “ultra-low latency, perfect for gaming and video calls,” while cable internet has “higher latency due to older coaxial cables.”
NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that T-Fiber offers lower latency than traditional cable internet and provides a performance advantage for gaming and video calls. NAD determined that the challenged claims were supported.
Peak-Hour Performance Claims
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours,” while cable internet “can slow down during peak hours due to shared bandwidth.”
NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that users of Spectrum’s traditional cable internet service can experience some reduction in performance during peak periods but does not convey the message that Spectrum customers will always experience a material slowdown or that Spectrum Internet becomes unreliable during peak periods. Accordingly, NAD determined the qualified statement that cable internet “can” slow down during peak hours is supported. NAD also found the claim that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours” was supported.
Scalability and Future-Proofing Claims
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s scalability and future-proofing claims, “Future-proof technology built for growing data demands,” “Limited scalability due to coaxial cable technology,” and “Fiber is built for the future, with fast upload and download speeds, whole-home coverage, and bandwidth for all your devices.” NAD determined that consumers are likely to understand the challenged claim as referring to the relative technological capabilities of fiber and traditional cable infrastructure, rather than to the pace or scope of a provider’s network investments. NAD found the challenged claims supported.
“Break Free From Big Cable Contracts”
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s advertising encouraging consumers to “Break free from big cable contracts” and offering to pay early termination fees. NAD determined that the headline, viewed together with the comparison to cable internet, reasonably conveys a broader message that major cable internet providers generally, and Spectrum in particular, require contracts from which consumers need to be freed and that they impose early termination fees.
NAD found that the broader message is not supported and recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim to avoid conveying the unsupported message that big cable internet providers, including Spectrum, necessarily require long-term contracts or impose early termination fees.
In its advertiser statement, T-Mobile stated that it “will comply with NAD’s recommendation.”
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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
National Advertising Division Finds Certain T-Mobile T-Fiber Claims Supported, Recommends Modification to Contract Claim
New York, NY – October 1, 2026 – Following a challenge brought by Charter Communications, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that T-Mobile US, Inc. provided support for certain comparative claims regarding T-Mobile Fiber (T-Fiber). However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim “Break free from big cable contracts.”
Charter and T-Mobile compete in the home internet market, with Charter offering residential service under the Spectrum brand via hybrid fiber-coaxial (HFC) and fiber-to-the-home (FTTH) networks, and T-Mobile offering FTTH through T-Fiber.
Traditional Cable Internet
Spectrum argued that T-Mobile’s advertising expressly contrasts fiber internet with “traditional cable internet” and that T-Mobile’s use of the phrase “cable internet” in the challenged advertising reasonably encompasses internet service offered over modern HFC networks by cable providers such as Spectrum.
NAD determined that the challenged advertising expressly frames the comparison as one between T-Fiber or fiber technology and traditional cable internet, which refers to services that employ hybrid fiber coaxial.
Speed Claims
Spectrum challenged claims that T-Fiber provides “up to gigabit upload and download speeds,” while cable internet has “uploads slower than downloads,” and that “cable internet often has slower upload speeds,” and “with fiber internet, you get significantly more uploading power than with most cable internet options.”
NAD determined that the speed comparison claims are supported as qualified descriptions of traditional cable internet generally and that the claim that fiber provides “significantly more uploading power than most cable internet options” is supported by the evidence regarding the prevalence of asymmetrical cable tiers and the limited availability of symmetrical upgraded HFC service.
Latency Claims
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber provides “ultra-low latency, perfect for gaming and video calls,” while cable internet has “higher latency due to older coaxial cables.”
NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that T-Fiber offers lower latency than traditional cable internet and provides a performance advantage for gaming and video calls. NAD determined that the challenged claims were supported.
Peak-Hour Performance Claims
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s claims that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours,” while cable internet “can slow down during peak hours due to shared bandwidth.”
NAD determined the advertising reasonably conveys the message that users of Spectrum’s traditional cable internet service can experience some reduction in performance during peak periods but does not convey the message that Spectrum customers will always experience a material slowdown or that Spectrum Internet becomes unreliable during peak periods. Accordingly, NAD determined the qualified statement that cable internet “can” slow down during peak hours is supported. NAD also found the claim that T-Fiber experiences “no slow down during peak hours” was supported.
Scalability and Future-Proofing Claims
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s scalability and future-proofing claims, “Future-proof technology built for growing data demands,” “Limited scalability due to coaxial cable technology,” and “Fiber is built for the future, with fast upload and download speeds, whole-home coverage, and bandwidth for all your devices.” NAD determined that consumers are likely to understand the challenged claim as referring to the relative technological capabilities of fiber and traditional cable infrastructure, rather than to the pace or scope of a provider’s network investments. NAD found the challenged claims supported.
“Break Free From Big Cable Contracts”
Spectrum challenged T-Mobile’s advertising encouraging consumers to “Break free from big cable contracts” and offering to pay early termination fees. NAD determined that the headline, viewed together with the comparison to cable internet, reasonably conveys a broader message that major cable internet providers generally, and Spectrum in particular, require contracts from which consumers need to be freed and that they impose early termination fees.
NAD found that the broader message is not supported and recommended that T-Mobile modify the claim to avoid conveying the unsupported message that big cable internet providers, including Spectrum, necessarily require long-term contracts or impose early termination fees.
In its advertiser statement, T-Mobile stated that it “will comply with NAD’s recommendation.”
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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
BBB National Programs Names Ahmad Akbari as Vice President, National Partners and Business Development
McLean, VA – September 28, 2026 – BBB National Programs today announced that Ahmad Akbari, a business and financial services executive with more than 25 years of experience across national operations, private banking, consumer and business banking, and financial consulting, has joined the organization as Vice President, Business Development and National Partners. The announcement was made by BBB National Programs President & CEO, Eric D. Reicin.
Effective immediately, Akbari will take on a key leadership role focused on strengthening BBB National Programs’ relationships with its growing National Partner community, expanding participation across its more than 20 programs, and identifying new opportunities to engage businesses and other stakeholders in advancing trust in the marketplace.
“I am pleased to welcome Ahmad to BBB National Programs, the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation,” said Reicin. “Ahmad brings a strong combination of business development experience, operational leadership, relationship-building skills, and a demonstrated ability to deliver results at a national scale. His experience building partnerships and leading complex businesses will be important as we continue to expand our reach and bring more organizations into our community.”
Akbari joins BBB National Programs from Capital One, where he most recently led the company’s national Café portfolio, overseeing customer experience and community engagement. During his career at Capital One and Accenture, he built and led teams, developed national partnerships, managed complex client relationships, and translated customer needs into practical growth plans. Ahmad holds a bachelor’s degree in finance and a master’s degree in business management from the University of Maryland.
Corporations, law firms, and associations that join BBB National Programs as National Partners demonstrate their commitment to voluntary industry self-regulation, including relevant industry-wide standards.
See a full list of National Partners here. To reach our media team, contact us at press@bbbnp.org.
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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
National Advertising Division Recommends Lipo Flavonoid Discontinue or Modify Certain Claims for Earwax Cleansing Kit & Aid Drops
New York, NY – September 24, 2026 – Following a challenge brought by eosera, inc., BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division recommended that Lipo Flavonoid LLC discontinue or modify certain express and implied claims for its Earwax Cleansing Kit & Aid Drops regarding product efficacy, safety, and physician recommendations.
Lipo Flavonoid LLC manufactures and sells the Earwax Cleansing Kit & Aid Drops, a cleansing solution engineered to dissolve earwax within the ear. Eosera challenged claims regarding the product’s speed of action, ability to prevent future wax buildup, safety, clinical testing, and physician recommendations.
Efficacy Claims
eosera challenged Lipo’s advertising that its earwax cleansing solution “dissolves earwax in as little as three minutes,” and other such efficacy claims.
Lipo submitted four in vitro tests showing substantial dissolution by three minutes. However, the National Advertising Division (NAD) found that the tests were not conducted under consumer-relevant conditions and recommended that Lipo discontinue the challenged speed-to-dissolution claims and related visualization.
Wax Prevention Claims
eosera challenged claims that Lipo’s product has a “Dual Action Formula: Cleanses + Controls future build-up” and “Prevents Wax Build-Up.”
NAD determined that the claims communicated product performance and that the packaging disclosure did not clearly or conspicuously limit the claims to the ingredients. NAD further found that the submitted studies did not support the claims because they were not conducted on Lipo’s cleansing solution and did not establish that the relevant ingredients prevent wax buildup in the ears.
NAD recommended that Lipo discontinue its “Dual Action Formula: Cleanses + Controls future build-up” and “Prevents Wax Build-Up” claims.
“Safe & Gentle” Claim
Lipo advertises that its cleansing solution has a “Safe & Gentle Formula.” Lipo submitted a confidential Human Repeat Insult Patch Test (HRIPT) in which a patch was repeatedly applied to the skin of adults. NAD concluded that the HRIPT was not a good fit for the claim and recommended that Lipo discontinue its “Safe & Gentle Formula” claim.
Clinically Tested Claims
eosera challenged claims that Lipo has a “clinically tested formula,” including “clinically tested dual action formula,” “Fast Acting Clinically Tested Formula,” and “clinically tested for effective ear cleaning.”
NAD determined that, in context, consumers would reasonably understand “clinically tested” to refer to efficacy, not safety, because the claims appear alongside claims about dissolving earwax, speed, and effective ear cleaning. NAD further determined that in vitro testing was not a good fit for a “clinically tested” claim, which consumers would reasonably understand to refer to testing on human subjects.
Accordingly, NAD recommended that Lipo discontinue its “clinically tested formula” claim.
“#1 Recommended” Claim
eosera challenged Lipo’s “#1 ENT Doctor Recommended” claim, which appeared on its packaging and Amazon. In support of the claim, Lipo submitted a survey of otolaryngologists conducted in late 2024 showing that Lipo was the most recommended brand for overall ear health.
NAD determined that, in the context of Lipo’s packaging, the claim communicates that this specific product is #1 recommended. Therefore, NAD recommended that Lipo modify its “#1 ENT Doctor Recommended” claim to avoid conveying that the claim applies to the Earwax Cleansing Kit & Aid Drops.
During the proceeding, Lipo voluntarily agreed to permanently discontinue certain challenged claims. These claims will be treated, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued.
In its statement, Lipo stated, “LIPO will comply with the 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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
Lex Machina Adds Enhanced Litigation Analytics for More Than 576,000 Miami-Dade Civil Lawsuits
Expansion includes comprehensive information for outcomes of more than 4,660 civil trials as well as access to more than 23 million docket entries
San Jose, CA, September 23, 2026 — LexisNexis® Legal & Professional announced today the release of enhanced analytics for more than 576,000 Miami-Dade Circuit Civil and County Civil lawsuits to Lex Machina®, the LexisNexis® Legal Analytics® platform. The release includes powerful litigation data and access to filings for commercially relevant civil cases filed in Miami-Dade since 2016. New cases, trial outcomes, and procedural milestones are added daily as litigation progresses.
This expansion pairs detailed analytics with nuanced insights into Miami-Dade lawsuits with issues ranging from condominium law, contracts, employment, insurance, medical malpractice, product liability, real property, vehicle torts, and more. These insights help customers evaluate litigation experience and understand how comparable lawsuits progressed and resolved at the trial level.
Key takeaways for legal and risk professionals in South Florida include:
- Plan litigation with Miami-Dade benchmarks: South Florida legal professionals can compare similar lawsuits to evaluate counsel and experience and understand case timing. A team representing an individual, insurer, condominium association, property manager, healthcare facility, or other business can help clients understand how cases like their own tend to resolve in terms of time and trial outcomes.
- Assess exposure in the Sunshine State: Legal and risk professionals handling storm-related property insurance disputes, for example, can use comparable Miami-Dade outcomes to assess risk and inform settlement discussions. Enhanced analytics for more than 4,660 civil trials in Miami-Dade since 2016 identify the prevailing party, damages awards, and the trial judge’s rulings.
- Analyze disputes involving South Florida business and litigation counsel: Customers can analyze cases handled by attorneys and law firms to assess their experience representing parties and litigating comparable disputes in Miami-Dade. Filters for case types, party industry codes, key procedural milestones, and more help users focus on cases and sectors like their own. As with all enhanced state court content in Lex Machina, customers receive direct access to underlying filings, with more than 23 million Miami-Dade docket entries to explore.
“When a client asks what to expect in a Miami-Date lawsuit, lawyers need practical benchmarks grounded in cases like theirs,” said Eric Wright, senior vice president for Lex Machina at LexisNexis. “This expansion gives legal teams a detailed view of how those cases progressed, who prevailed at trial, and what damages the court awarded. Connecting those insights with the underlying filings helps our customers explain litigation risk and make better-informed decisions about how to handle a matter.”
To learn more about enhanced Miami-Dade litigation analytics or request a demonstration, please visit https://www.lexisnexis.com/en-us/products/lex-machina.page.
The Lex Machina platform equips litigation professionals to develop stronger case strategies and generate business. From precise timing metrics that inform legal budgeting to trend data on top law firms and leading judges, Lex Machina supplements traditional legal research and experience with customized, data-backed insights. These insights help lawyers identify and pursue new matters, navigate motion and trial strategies, and negotiate smarter settlements, ultimately giving firms a competitive edge in litigation.
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.
About Lex Machina
Lex Machina® fundamentally changes how companies and law firms compete in the business and practice of law. The company provides strategic insights on judges, lawyers, law firms, parties, and other critical information across 22 federal practice areas and a rapidly growing number of state courts. Lex Machina allows law firms and companies to anticipate the behaviors and outcomes that different legal strategies will produce, supporting more effective case strategy and business development efforts.
Lex Machina was named Winner of the “Overall LegalTech Data Solution Provider of the Year” LegalTech Breakthrough Award 2025, “Best Data Analytics & Insight Solution” 2025 CODiE Award, and Winner of the “Media Excellence Award” for Analytics/Big Data 2024. Based in Silicon Valley, Lex Machina is part of LexisNexis®, a leading global provider of legal, regulatory, and business information and analytics.
Media Contact
Venture PR lexmachina@venturepr.co
Contact Information
Name: Kylee Nguyen
Email: kylee@venturepr.co
Job Title: Account Executive
Following National Advertising Division Inquiry, Guardian Voluntarily Modifies “40% Off” Savings and Strikethrough Pricing Claims
New York, NY – September 23, 2026 – Following an inquiry brought by BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division as part of its routine monitoring program, Syscend, Inc. d/b/a Guardian Bikes modified certain advertising claims and practices concerning its children’s and adult bicycles, including savings claims, strikethrough pricing, limited-time sale language, and consecutive countdown timers.
Guardian manufactures bicycles marketed for adults and children. The National Advertising Division (NAD) reviewed “40% off” savings claims and limited-time sale language across social media, promotional emails, website product and checkout pages, and third-party search advertising.
Limited-Time Sale Advertising and Associated Claims
NAD considered whether advertising that paired “40% off” claims with limited-time sale language and a free-accessory offer conveyed an unsupported message that consumers would receive both a temporary 40% discount from Guardian’s ordinary prices and free accessories.
During the inquiry, Guardian stated that it would modify its advertising to make clear that the savings reflect everyday competitor comparisons, clarify that limited-time accessory bundles are separate from comp-value savings, and ensure sale indicators clearly state what is included.
NAD will treat Guardian’s modifications as recommendations accepted for compliance purposes. NAD further recommended that clarifying language appear in the main claim or in a clear and conspicuous, noncontradictory disclosure that is repeated where necessary.
Strike-Through Pricing Claims
NAD also reviewed Guardian’s use of strikethrough pricing, including reference prices that did not clearly disclose that the comparison was based on comparable value rather than Guardian’s own former price for the same product.
During the inquiry, Guardian stated that it would modify its advertising to provide conspicuous comparative-value disclosures. Additionally, Guardian stated that it worked with Google and Meta to remove or revise ads that displayed comparison pricing without the required disclosures and stated that it would monitor its advertising and remove comparison pricing that lacked the disclosures.
NAD will treat Guardian’s modifications as accepted for compliance purposes. NAD further recommended that any qualifying language clearly identify the strikethrough price as the comparable value of competitors’ bikes and appear in the main claim or in a clear and conspicuous disclosure that does not contradict the main claim and is repeated where necessary.
In its advertiser statement, Guardian Bikes states they “agreed to comply.”
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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
National Advertising Division Recommends Westinghouse Outdoor Power Equipment’s Disclose Testing Conditions for Max PSI and GPM Claims
New York, NY – September 22, 2026 – Following a reopened inquiry, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Westinghouse Outdoor Power Equipment provided a reasonable basis for its maximum pressure and flow rate claims for certain electric pressure washers under the conditions tested and recommended that it clearly and conspicuously disclose the specific operating conditions to achieve maximum PSI and GPM claims.
The previous challenge (Case #7496), brought by competitor TTi Outdoor Power Equipment, Inc., alleging that Westinghouse inflated the pressure and flow rate of its pressure washers in its advertising. In that challenge, NAD recommended that Westinghouse discontinue its express claims and, because Westinghouse declined to comply with that recommendation, NAD referred the matter to relevant government authorities.
Westinghouse petitioned to reopen the proceeding and provided new testing to support its express claims.
Westinghouse advertises the pressure and flow rate of its pressure washers as max PSI and max GPM. TTi argued that these claims are unsupported.
NAD found that Westinghouse makes max PSI and max GPM claims without any qualification or disclosure that the max PSI and GPM can only be achieved under a very particular set of conditions. NAD therefore concluded that Westinghouse’s unqualified max PSI and max GPM claims did not sufficiently inform consumers of the material limitations of the claims.
NAD also found that TTi’s testing was a poor fit for Westinghouse’s maximum pressure and flow rate claims.
Accordingly, NAD recommended that Westinghouse clearly and conspicuously disclose the circumstances under which its claimed maximum PSI and GPM are obtainable, including that maximum pressure is measured through three-second trigger cycles.
NAD also determined that claims that do not identify the PSI and GPM rates as “max” are not supported. NAD noted that Westinghouse had already agreed to modify its advertising to avoid conveying the message that consumers could reach both maximum pressure and maximum flow rate simultaneously.
In its advertiser statement, Westinghouse Outdoor Power Equipment stated 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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
National Advertising Division Recommends Westinghouse Outdoor Power Equipment’s Disclose Testing Conditions for Max PSI and GPM Claims
New York, NY – September 22, 2026 – Following a reopened inquiry, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that Westinghouse Outdoor Power Equipment provided a reasonable basis for its maximum pressure and flow rate claims for certain electric pressure washers under the conditions tested and recommended that it clearly and conspicuously disclose the specific operating conditions to achieve maximum PSI and GPM claims.
The previous challenge (Case #7496), brought by competitor TTi Outdoor Power Equipment, Inc., alleging that Westinghouse inflated the pressure and flow rate of its pressure washers in its advertising. In that challenge, NAD recommended that Westinghouse discontinue its express claims and, because Westinghouse declined to comply with that recommendation, NAD referred the matter to relevant government authorities.
Westinghouse petitioned to reopen the proceeding and provided new testing to support its express claims.
Westinghouse advertises the pressure and flow rate of its pressure washers as max PSI and max GPM. TTi argued that these claims are unsupported.
NAD found that Westinghouse makes max PSI and max GPM claims without any qualification or disclosure that the max PSI and GPM can only be achieved under a very particular set of conditions. NAD therefore concluded that Westinghouse’s unqualified max PSI and max GPM claims did not sufficiently inform consumers of the material limitations of the claims.
NAD also found that TTi’s testing was a poor fit for Westinghouse’s maximum pressure and flow rate claims.
Accordingly, NAD recommended that Westinghouse clearly and conspicuously disclose the circumstances under which its claimed maximum PSI and GPM are obtainable, including that maximum pressure is measured through three-second trigger cycles.
NAD also determined that claims that do not identify the PSI and GPM rates as “max” are not supported. NAD noted that Westinghouse had already agreed to modify its advertising to avoid conveying the message that consumers could reach both maximum pressure and maximum flow rate simultaneously.
In its advertiser statement, Westinghouse Outdoor Power Equipment stated 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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
National Advertising Division Recommends Starkey Laboratories Modify or Discontinue Certain Omega AI Hearing Aid Claims
New York, NY – September 17, 2026 – Following a challenge by Sonova USA Inc., BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division recommended that Starkey Laboratories, Inc. modify or discontinue certain advertising claims for its Omega AI hearing aid, including certain claims concerning speech intelligibility, spatial awareness, competitive performance, and “better hearing all around,” as well as modify its claim that it is “the leader in hearing healthcare.”
Sonova and Starkey are competitors in the prescription hearing aid market. Starkey’s Omega AI hearing aid includes its “always on” Deep Neural Network (DNN) AI technology. Consumers obtain hearing aids like Omega AI through audiologists and other hearing care professionals. The claims at issue appear in Starkey’s Technical Product Handbook, professional pamphlets, starkeypro.com website, a press release, and social media posts.
In evaluating Starkey’s substantiation, the National Advertising Division (NAD) considered the use of AI testing to support advertising claims. NAD determined that AI testing is an emerging area with potential benefits but emphasized that testing must be properly validated for the specific claims being supported, particularly when claims convey real-world consumer benefits.
Better Hearing All Around Claim
Sonova challenged Starkey’s claim that Omega AI “delivers better hearing all around.” Starkey discontinued the claim on its website and in a pamphlet but sought to retain it as a caption accompanying an online video.
Starkey’s study found that, among participants who expressed a preference, 94% preferred Omega AI for directionality and 96% preferred Omega AI for speech clarity, but 52% and 42% of participants, respectively, expressed no preference.
NAD noted its precedent that unqualified preference claims should not be made when 20% or more of respondents express no preference. Therefore, NAD recommended that Starkey discontinue the claim or modify it to clearly and conspicuously disclose that the 94% or 96% results are limited to “those who expressed a preference” and that the preference was as compared to Starkey’s prior technology.
Spatial Awareness Claims
Sonova challenged Starkey’s claims that Omega AI provides “up to 8 dB SNR improvement for better spatial awareness” and “offering up to an 8 dB SNR advantage and ensuring awareness of the surroundings.” Starkey permanently modified the claims on its website and in a pamphlet to reference its prior technology and NAD reviewed the modified claim.
NAD determined that the broad “up to 8 dB SNR improvement for better spatial awareness” claim was not a good fit for the submitted evidence and recommended that Starkey discontinue the claim or modify it to clearly and conspicuously disclose the basis for the claim and that the comparison is against Starkey’s prior technology.
Competitive Claims
Sonova challenged Starkey’s claims that Omega AI is “better than the rest in noisy conditions,” provides “superior performance with up to a 6.5 dB advantage (70% improvement) in speech intelligibility measures compared to all major brands,” and “consistently outperforms other brands, delivering up to 6.5 dB advantage (70% better performance) in complex, noisy listening situations.”
Starkey modified its advertising to add the word “predictive” before “speech intelligibility.” Starkey supported the claims with laboratory testing using Whisper Automatic Speech Recognition (ASR), an AI speech-to-text system, to compare flagship hearing aid products from six major brands.
NAD determined that a reasonable consumer would understand the challenged claims as conveying real-world performance and that the word “predictive” was insufficient to qualify that message. NAD further determined that the record did not establish that Whisper ASR’s emerging technology had been validated to support a claim about measurable outcomes for actual hearing aid wearers. Therefore, NAD recommended that Starkey discontinue the challenged competitive claims.
The Leader in Healthcare Claim
Sonova challenged Starkey’s claim that it is “the leader in hearing healthcare.” NAD determined that the evidence submitted may support a claim that Starkey is “a” leader in hearing healthcare but did not support the broader claim that Starkey is “the” leader. Therefore, NAD recommended that Starkey modify the claim to clarify the metrics on which the claim is based.
Starkey advised NAD that it will permanently modify the claims “28% better speech intelligibility” and “28% improved speech intelligibility.” Therefore, NAD did not review these claims on their merits and, for compliance purposes, will treat the voluntary modifications as though NAD had recommended the modification.
In its advertiser statement, Starkey stated, “Although Starkey respectfully disagrees with several aspects of NAD’s decision, Starkey will comply with it.”
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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: jrosenberg@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations
National Advertising Division Finds Qualified Saffron Claim Supported; Recommends Alice Mushrooms Discontinue Zen-X Health Claim
New York, NY – September 16, 2026 – As part of its monitoring program, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division examined Alice Mushrooms, LLC’s support for health claims made for its Zen-X mushroom-containing chocolate products. The National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that Alice Mushrooms modify its Zen-X claim to make clear that the health benefit claim is limited to saffron.
At issue for NAD was Alice Mushrooms’ support for its claims that its products provide health benefits including energy, libido support, and deep sleep. Zen-X touts its calming properties, specifically that “cool, calm and collected is one delicious bite away.”
In support of its claim, Alice Mushrooms relied on studies of three key ingredients: L-theanine, kanna, and saffron, arguing that the ingredient-level evidence collectively provided a reasonable basis for its claims. NAD determined that Alice Mushrooms did not have a reasonable basis for the Zen-X claim “cool, calm and collected is one delicious bite away” and reviewed the ingredient studies to see if a qualified claim could be supported.
NAD determined that the evidence in the record was not a good fit to demonstrate the impact of L-theanine and kanna extract to confer the following claimed benefits: cool, calm and collected, and clear headed, but noted that nothing in the decision prevents Alice Mushrooms from making a qualified claim as to kanna’s safety and tolerability.
As to saffron, NAD determined that one of the clinical studies on the same dose of saffron as in Alice Mushrooms included many indicia of reliability and found statistically significant results on measures, including tension, stress, and vigor. NAD recommended that Alice Mushrooms modify the claim “cool, calm and collected is one delicious bite away” to make clear that it is limited to saffron.
During the inquiry, Mushrooms voluntarily discontinued the challenged claims for its Brainstorm product and all but one of the challenged claims for Zen-X. The permanently discontinued claims will be treated, for compliance purposes, as though NAD recommended they be discontinued and Alice Mushrooms agreed to comply.
In its advertiser statement, Alice Mushrooms stated that 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.
Contact Information
Name: Jennifer Rosenberg
Email: press@bbbnp.org
Job Title: Media Relations