ASA Adjudication on Easylife Group Ltd

Easylife Group Ltd

11-13 King's Terrace
London
NW1 0JB

Date:

12 March 2008

Media:

Brochure, Insert, Magazine

Sector:

Retail

Number of complaints:

2

Complaint Ref:

41989

Ad

A brochure, for household and personal goods, inserted in a magazine, included an ad headed "A botanical wonder of nature". Below, text stated "Found on the ocean bed, the 'Neptune' plant is a wonder of nature. Unable to be classified in any botanical category, it retains its luminous green hue for years without watering. A natural repellent, it emits fragrant secretions which drive insects away, especially flies. Evergreen and decorative, it's supplied in its own plastic pot ..."

Issue

1. Two customers believed the ad was misleading because they questioned whether the Neptune was a real plant.

2.  The ASA challenged whether the claim that the Neptune was a natural insect repellent could be substantiated.

CAP Code (Edition 11)

Response

1. Easylife Group (Easylife) said they had been selling the product for a number of years and had not received an enquiry of this kind before.  They sent a copy of a letter from a French scientific environmental organisation, which stated that they had examined a sample of the Neptune and believed that, rather than being artificial, it was a plant, or more precisely dried sea algae which had been dyed green.   

2. Easylife said the efficacy of the Neptune to drive insects away had not been called into question before. They provided no substantiation to back the claim.

Assessment

1. Upheld

The ASA noted algae found in water or moist ground were generally classified as unicellular or multicellular forms and considered plant-like, even though they lacked true stems, roots or leaves.  However, we considered that the two-sentence letter from the environmental organisation was insufficient evidence to prove that the Neptune itself was a sea plant.   We considered that readers would expect the Neptune to be a living plant and, because it was not, concluded that the ad was misleading.  

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

2. Upheld

We noted Easylife had not provided evidence to show that the Neptune was capable of emitting secretions that drove insects away.  Because we saw no substantiation to support the claim, we concluded that the claim was misleading.

On this point, the ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).

Action

We told Easylife not to use the ad again.

Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)

Making a complaint

Find out what types of ads we deal with and how to make a complaint.

How to complain

Adjudications

View our latest weekly ASA adjudications or search for rulings from the last five years.

Adjudications

Non-compliant online advertisers

Check the list of non-compliant online advertisers.

Non-compliant online advertisers

Sign up

Sign up for adjudications alerts and newsletters.

Sign up

Already registered? Log in

Follow Us

For ASA news, including our weekly rulings, press releases, research and reports.
ASA_UK

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

We work hard to ensure our complaints procedures are transparent. Here we answer some commonly asked questions about how we handle complaints.

Dealing with complaints - FAQs

Advertising Standards Authority Ltd, Mid City Place, 71 High Holborn, London WC1V 6QT  |  Copyright © 2012 ASA