Ad description

A website for Green Tree Timber, www.greentreedoors.co.uk, seen in July 2017, included a web page titled “External Frames”, which stated “External premium solid Malaysian oak door frames suitable for use with 44mm thick external oak doors. Manufactured using selected premium oak and supplied unfinished ready for you to –finish …”.

Issue

The complainant, who believed that Malaysian oak was rubberwood, challenged whether the claim that the product was made of Malaysian oak was misleading and could be substantiated.

Response

Green Tree Timber Ltd t/a Green Tree doors said that they were not supplying rubberwood. They said in 2002, the Malaysian Ministry of Primary Industries marketed rubberwood under the name "Malaysian oak". They said that was no longer the case. They said the species they were selling was known as Kembang Semangkok (KSK). KSK was not rubberwood, but was not known in Europe by its local name. They said KSK looked very similar to oak (Quercus spp.) so they used Malaysian oak as a simpler description. However, they said they also stated KSK’s botanical name – Scaphium spp – to differentiate it from European and American oaks (Quercus spp). They said the name “Malaysian oak” was widely used in the UK and Europe and that a number of similar websites to theirs had used it.

They also supplied shipping documents for a consignment of timber which stated the timber was KSK. They also supplied us with a website link which stated KSK was suitable for all external joinery, had no commercial restrictions and was 100% PEFC (Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification) Certified.

Assessment

Upheld

The ASA considered that consumers would understand “External premium solid Malaysian oak door frames” to mean those door frames were made from oak originating from and/or grown in Malaysia.

We acknowledged that KSK was not rubberwood and may have had the appearance of oak. However, we understood KSK was not oak and we did not consider that consumers would understand “Malaysian oak” to mean that the product was made of KSK wood.

Because the door frames were not made from oak, we considered the claim was likely to mislead.

The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules  3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so.  and  3.3 3.3 Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer by omitting material information. They must not mislead by hiding material information or presenting it in an unclear, unintelligible, ambiguous or untimely manner.
Material information is information that the consumer needs to make informed decisions in relation to a product. Whether the omission or presentation of material information is likely to mislead the consumer depends on the context, theĀ  medium and, if the medium of the marketing communication is constrained by time or space, the measures that the marketer takes to make that information available to the consumer by other means.
 (Misleading Advertising) and  3.7 3.7 Before distributing or submitting a marketing communication for publication, marketers must hold documentary evidence to prove claims that consumers are likely to regard as objective and that are capable of objective substantiation. The ASA may regard claims as misleading in the absence of adequate substantiation.  (Substantiation).

Action

The ad must not appear again in the form complained of. We told the advertiser to ensure they did not describe their products as oak if they were not made from oak.

CAP Code (Edition 12)

3.1     3.3     3.7    


More on