ASA Adjudication on Easylife Group Ltd
Easylife Group Ltd
11-13 King's Terrace
London
NW1 0JB
Trinity Mirror plc
One Canada Square
Canary Wharf
London
E14 5AP
Date:
2 September 2009
Media:
Catalogue
Sector:
Health and beauty
Number of complaints:
1
Complaint Ref:
93336
Ad
A catalogue, inserted in the national press, advertised a Professional Mattress Cleaner. It stated "Get any mattress hygienically clean. Mattresses are not washable, yet we use them 8 hours a day, sharing those precious hours with dust mites, mite droppings, bacteria, viruses, mould, fungus, flakes and odours. Simply spray on ... and leave for 24 hours for a bacteria-free, hygienically clean and fresh smelling mattress ...".
Issue
The complainant, who believed the ad implied that mattresses would be bacteria-free after using the product, challenged whether the claim "Get any mattress hygienically clean" was misleading and could be substantiated.
CAP Code (Edition 11)
Response
Easylife Group (Easylife) submitted a document titled "The Use of Pyrethrum Formulations in the control of Fleas and Lice Infestations" and a safety data sheet for a product named "Milben Ex.", which was described as an insecticide. They said Milben Ex was another name for the Professional Mattress Cleaner. Easylife also sent information about the product's ingredients which they said were widely accepted as pesticides.
Assessment
Upheld
The ASA noted the article referred to how certain formulations containing pyrethrum could treat lice and flea infestations. However, the article related to the use of that ingredient for personal hygiene purposes, such as the treatment of head lice, not its efficacy when used on fabric. We noted the safety data sheet but considered that it was insufficient to substantiate efficacy claims for the Professional Mattress Cleaner as it merely listed the products ingredients and properties and sought to advise how best to handle and store it.
In any event, the ad claimed that mattresses would be "bacteria-free" and "hygienically clean" after using the product. We noted we had not seen product-specific documentary evidence to support that. In the absence of such evidence, we concluded that the ad was misleading.
The ad breached CAP Code clauses 3.1 (Substantiation) and 7.1 (Truthfulness).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form.
Adjudication of the ASA Council (Non-broadcast)