• ABOUT ASCI
  • COMPLAINTS
  • CONSUMER
  • INDUSTRY
  • ASCI UPDATES
  • CONTACT US
Advertising with a Conscience

Select Month :

 
ASCI Recommendations
 

COMPANY:"Safechem Industries"
PRODUCT:"Sparkle Dishwash Tub"

COMPLAINT:

"TVC claim - “Ek Sparkle, 9000 bartan” Print Ad claim - “Chamke 9000 bartan sirf ek tub sparkle se”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"TVC claim - “Ek Sparkle, 9000 bartan” Print Ad claim - “Chamke 9000 bartan sirf ek tub sparkle se”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time they informed that they would like to seek a review of the CCC recommendation. As claim support data for review, the advertiser submitted additional details of the laboratory report of the tests conducted on the performance of the product. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and the TVC, and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertiser provided more details of their protocol and test conditions. The test includes a mix of utensils such as standard plates of a fixed area, mix of utensils - spoons, different types of plates, vatis, etc. For this mix, the test showed the total Utensil cleaning efficiency of Sparkle Lime Dishwasher Tub (700gms) is >9000. While this appears to be reasonable yet a self-defined way of getting to the number of 9000, the CCC noted that this is not a standard industry accepted independent protocol. The protocol does not appear to account for product wastage that is likely due to the product getting soggy. In addition, the advertisements predominantly show only large utensils such as dishes and plates in their visuals, and in one case they even show only steel plates. This is likely to create an impression that the number 9000 applies to utensils like plates. The CCC concluded that the claim (in Hindi) in the TVC, “Ek Sparkle, 9000 bartan”, and the claim (in Hindi) in the print Ad, “Chamke 9000 bartan sirf ek tub sparkle se”, were not substantiated adequately and are misleading by ambiguity and implication. Also, the advertisement is not in compliance with the ASCI Guidelines on Disclaimers. The TVC and the print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The CCC recommendation that the complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

COMPANY:"Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited"
PRODUCT:"Revital H"

COMPLAINT:

"I wanted to complain against the revital ad campaign. The manufacturer claims that the product gives a person (lot of) energy to face the day. This ad, I feel, is very misleading. Ginseng which is one of the ingredients in Revital has caused many deaths in Germany, USA and UK due to its side effects. WHO has cautioned authorities to curb non-medical use of Ginseng. But still this product is sold. Also, the ingredients in Revital are not capable to take care of any deficiency/malnutrition. For eg: Revital has 200IU of vitamin D where as in case one has a deficiency of the same, doctors prescribe the person at least 60000 IU per week. I request you to look into this advertisement. The most recent ad is viral on both the Internet and Television. https://youtu.be/NlkF208l7Zo This is a video on YouTube."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time they informed that they would like to seek a review of the CCC recommendation and submitted additional data for Review. The advertiser also volunteered to add the word “Helps” to further qualify their claim while seeking a review and agreed to modify the disclaimers to comply with the ASCI guidelines. Advertiser states that as per international practice, if any product contains at least 15% of the RDA recommended level for Vitamins and Minerals, it is considered as a source of that vitamin/mineral and a claim to this effect with respect to the benefit associated with it can be made for permitted claims. And that the amounts of vitamins and minerals added in the Revital H formulation is higher than 15% RDA levels where a claim is being derived viz. Vitamin B1, B2, B3, Iron and Iodine contribute to normal energy yielding metabolism at a daily supplement basis. They further submitted that as per FSSAI requirements, 90-400mg Ginseng extract is permitted in foods which contains around 0.7 to 3.0% of Ginsenosides. Effectively the alterable quantity of Ginsenosides ranges from 0.63 to 12mg and their Product uses highly standardized form of Ginseng extract that contains about 4.25 - 5.1mg Ginsenosides. Thus, the same is also well within the FSSAI norms and submitted the supplier COA of Ginseng extract. This additional claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertiser has supported the claim by giving composition of Revital H and also compared it against the ICMR RDA requirements. Revital H has Vitamins and minerals viz. Vitamin B1, B2, B3, Iron and Iodine and these are fulfilling the requirements as per International norms to claim “…contributes to normal energy yielding metabolism” , “…contributes to the reduction of tiredness and fatigue” The CCC concluded that the claim, “…. Mehnat karne ki energy (dene mein madad karta) hai Revital H”, was substantiated . The complaint is Not Upheld on Review subject to the addition of the word “helps”."

COMPANY:"Zero Enthalpy Labs Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Zevia Sweetener"

COMPLAINT:

“Prevents Gingivitis”, “Can help Regulate Hypertension”, “Anti - bacterial & Anti – fungal”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI had approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. However, in the absence of response prior to the due date, the matter was examined by the CCC on the basis of the materials available then and an exparte decision was taken. On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with supporting data for the claims made. ASCI accepted their response for a Review of the CCC recommendation. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing. Advertiser states that the intention was to convey the potential benefits of the product and not to present it as a cure for any of the disease. As claim support data, the advertiser provided few published articles on sweeteners and their role in oral health and hypertension management. The claim support data by the advertiser was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of Technical expert presented at the meeting. Claim – “Prevents Gingivitis” – The CCC noted that the cause for Gingivitis is due to the deposition of sugar and starchy foods in the mouth creating acidic environment. Zevia being a natural sweetener may help to lessen this effect to a larger extent. However this alone cannot justify the claim since Zevia alone would not promote gingivitis by itself , However, it can not prevent Gigivitis caused by other food. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Prevents Gingivitis”, was not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. Claim – “Can help regulate Hypertension” – Advertiser submitted one published clinical study paper on the effect of stevioside in human hypertension reduction. In this case a capsule containing stevioside 250mg trice a day has been used to study its effect on hypertension reduction. Whereas Zevia is promoted as a natural sweetener and its dosage to replace sugar in foods will depend of the type of food and its dosage. It is not anticipated to be consumed as per dosages in the clinical research paper. The CCC observed that the study results are not relevant for the use of stevia as a natural sweetener in food and hence the results of the study are not relevant and can not be extrapolated. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Can help regulate Hypertension”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity. Claim – “Anti Bacterial and Anti Fungal” - Zevia being promoted as a sweetener, this claim is not proven in this context. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Anti Bacterial and Anti Fungal”, is misleading by implication. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The CCC recommendation that the complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:""GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd""
PRODUCT:"Horlicks Oats"

COMPLAINT:

“Helps Manage Healthy Blood Pressure”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time the advertiser was explained the rationale for CCC recommendation. Subsequently, the advertiser responded with additional data for review of the CCC recommendation. Advertiser states that since the US FDA claim talks about risk reduction for a medical from the US FDA claim given that the product falls in the category of food. They referred to the EFSA guideline which permits a claim of "reducing consumption of sodium contributes to the maintenance of normal blood pressure" and also offered to modify the advertisement to make “low sodium” feature more prominent in the advertisement. As claim support data for review, the advertiser provided EFSA Guidelines on health claims permitted on Food. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the claim, “Helps Manage Healthy Blood Pressure”, by the advertiser is quite different from the International approach by the USFDA or EFSA wherein the claim itself refers to the “low sodium” feature and presents the benefit more as a “possibility” than an “assurance”. In view of the same, the CCC advised for the CCC recommendations to be the same as conveyed earlier. In addition, observation was made that the disclaimer in the advertisement contravened Clauses 2 and 3 of the ASCI’s revised Guidelines for Disclaimers. The CCC recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on Review. "

COMPANY:"Army Institute of Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“100% Placement”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Many educational institutions have been regularly publishing misleading advertisements in newspapers promising 100% placement or hike in salary. Some such examples are given below. Army Institute of Management Published in page 15 of the Telegraph, Bhubaneshwar edition on 18.09.2016 ""100% Placement"" I enclose the news cutting for your perusal and necessary action”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement", was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Institute of professional education and research"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“100% Placement”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Many educational institutions have been regularly publishing misleading advertisements in newspapers promising 100% placement or hike in salary. Some such examples are given below. Institute of Professional Education and Research Published in page 7 of Dharitri, Bhubaneswar edition on 26.08.2016. '100% Placement"" Published in page 5 of Dharitri, Bhubaneswar edition on 17.08.2016 ""100% Placement"""

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement", was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"L’Oréal India P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Maybelline New York Super Black Colossal Kajal"

COMPLAINT:

"“Super Lasting: Waterproof, smudgeproof formula stays intense for 16 hours”, “Super Smooth: Enriched with Oil for super smooth application. It glides on effortlessly and evenly, to perfectly defined eyes – in one smooth stroke – while adding a rich, glossy sheen to the colour result that lasts all day”, “For the boldest black look that enhances the natural colour and shine of your eyes – in a single stroke”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"It may be noted that the on the Product, Advertiser makes, amongst others, the following claims: 1. SUPER LASTING: Waterproof, smudgeproof formula stays intense for 16 hours; 2. SUPER SMOOTH: Enriched with Oil for super smooth application. It glides on effortlessly and evenly, to perfectly defined eyes – in one smooth stroke – while adding a rich, glossy sheen to the colour result that lasts all day. The Advertiser shall be called upon to substantiate the claims by appropriate clinical data. In absence of such data, it is frivolous and deceiving to make the above mentioned claims and more particularly the following claims: 1. “Waterproof” and “Smudgeproof” This claim made on the Advertiser’s Product essentially infers that the Product is completely and absolutely waterproof and smudgeproof. It is submitted that, considering the nature of the Product, such claim is unlikely to be true; 2. “Stays intense for 16 hours” The claim essentially infers that the Product, upon its application, would stay intense for 16 hours. There is no reference of any substantiation/research by the Advertiser on the Product and in absence of the same the claim is misleading. Moreover this claim would also mean that the Advertiser’s Product, on application, will last for a period which is much longer than 16 hours, may be without being intense, as is being claimed. The Advertiser be put to strict proof in support of such tall claims; 3. “For the boldest black look that enhances the natural colour and shine of your eyes – in a single stroke”. This claim essentially means that the boldest look can be achieved in a single stroke of the Product. The claim shall essentially be supported by the Consumer usage data. The claims made on the Product are absolute claims and there is no mention of any substantiation/qualifier/disclaimer on the Product packaging in relation to such claims, nor does the Product refer to any research or assessment as contemplated in Chapter 1.2 of the ASCI Code for Self-regulation."

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time, the advertiser explained the rationale of claim support data and submitted the details of the study. Advertiser states that the claims made are based on the instrumental tests performed by a third party clinical research and a consumer study (Blind Use test, Monadic). As claim support data, the advertiser provided Smudge Proof Intense tests results, instrumental test result that demonstrates that the product is waterproof, and a copy of the consumer test (Blind Use test, Monadic). The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the product packaging and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC concluded that the pack claims, “Super Lasting: Waterproof, smudgeproof formula stays intense for 16 hours”, “Super Smooth: Enriched with Oil for super smooth application. It glides on effortlessly and evenly, to perfectly defined eyes – in one smooth stroke – while adding a rich, glossy sheen to the colour result that lasts all day”, and “For the boldest black look that enhances the natural colour and shine of your eyes – in a single stroke”, were substantiated with third party test reports. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Cheil India P. Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Samsung Galaxy S7"

COMPLAINT:

“The water resistant smart phone you will fall in love with”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“The advertisement shows the Samsung S7 and S7 edge to resist any water contact. The phones are also splashed into the sink filled with water and the phone is completely submerged in it. The actor pulls out the phone and shows that its still working.I n the end the Water Resistant appears. The promise made by the company Samsung is that their phones Samsung S7 and S7 edge are completely water resistant while when i tested the same thing with my S7 edge and the phone got damaged and the Samsung executives are not adhering to the promise made by them.”

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time, they submitted claim support data for the claims made. They also expressed willingness to reach out to the complainant to understand the technical problem he is facing with his phone. Advertiser states that the feature of the Product highlighted in the advertisement is “water resistant” and this claim is supported with a necessary disclaimer, “The device is water resistant at IP68 rating which tests fresh water submersion up to 1.5m for up to 30 minutes”. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a test report from the Korea Electrical Safety Corporation Safety Test Centre (KESCO), articles and technical reviews for the product, and videos showing Samsung Galaxy S7 vs iPhone 6S Waterproof Test posted in the public domain. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that claim as depicted in the TVC of the phone being water resistant “Galaxy S7 edge – the water-resistant smartphone” was substantiated via the IP68 test certificates for fresh water immersion tests. The CCC also noted that the advertiser has promptly offered to reach out to the consumer to address issues he may be facing. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Able Exports "
PRODUCT:"Feel fresh mouth care"

COMPLAINT:

"“My objection are as follows: 1) The Ad introduces an Ayurvedic liquid for mouth gargle and mouth and dental problems as a simple and safe treatment without tablet, powder or paste the best treatment. The Ad further states that the current medical treatment (with allopathic medicines) has become very costly and has side effects and as an alternative only Ayurvedic treatment is the option. Feel Fresh Moth Gargle Liquid is the Ayurvedic medicine the only medicine of its kind in the whole world which treats all kinds of problems of mouth teeth gums tonsils, the food pipe, wind pipe etc. It is a ready-to-use liquid and no water is to be added for dilution. Even if it is used often daily or even taken in through mistake, there is no harm. This medicine can be used even if there are no oral health problems. Even for children and people using dentures can use it without any problem for oral hygiene. Dental bacteria, pests are destroyed and teeth and gums are kept healthy. The slimy feeling in the mouth, cough, food particles in the dental crevices are cleaned and kept fresh. It even removes the bad smell due to onion and garlic or use of alcohol. It makes one free of using the tooth pick to remove obstructing particles. Feel fresh is available in all medical stores. Helpline Nos: 9016115353, 8866027172. 2) Following diseases are clearly mentioned. Mouth sores, bad smell or bad breath, pyoria, swelling and blood from gums, oral and tonsil pain, dental infection, dental pain, problems of mouth and other difficulties due to tobacco chewing etc. 3) There is no name of manufacturing company, no names of ingredients, no reference to any scientific study or proof for all claims made and no proof of usefulness for children, even when swallowed through mistake. 4) These are all high claims without any scientific proofs of the effectiveness of this medicine for all the problems described. A gullible consumer would be cheated if he uses it and gets no effect or no cure. Calling the gargle liquid ayurvedic does not make it safe for use. If it has ayurvedic ingredients they must be clearly specified so that consumer can atleast feel sure for its use. 5) Such Ads dupe the consumer and before any kind of adverse reaction case gets reported in the media, the company gets its share of business. In the name of ayurvedic anything is offered to the ignorant and gullible consumer. Kindly look into the above objections, call for companys reply and then decide on my complaint. Kindly keep me informed.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement.. In the absence of claim support data such as product composition or efficacy, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarathi) as translated in English, “an Ayurvedic liquid for mouth gargle and mouth and dental problems, is a simple and safe treatment without tablet, powder or paste, the best treatment”, “Feel Fresh Mouth Gargle Liquid is the Ayurvedic medicine, the only medicine of its kind in the whole world which treats all kinds of problems of mouth, teeth, gums, tonsils, the food pipe, wind pipe etc. It is a ready-to-use liquid and no water is to be added for dilution. Even if it is used often daily or even taken in through mistake, there is no harm. This medicine can be used even if there are no oral health problems. Even for children and people using dentures can use it without any problem for oral hygiene. Dental bacteria, pests are destroyed and teeth and gums are kept healthy. The slimy feeling in the mouth, cough, food particles in the dental crevices are cleaned and kept fresh. It even removes the bad smell due to onion and garlic or use of alcohol. It makes one free of using the tooth pick to remove obstructing particles”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bombay Barbeque"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“The advertisement is placed in today's HT café Hindustan times newspaper page number 8. It shows a delivery boy riding a scooter with cap on his head instead of Helmet. Riding a two wheeler without helmet is a punishable offence as per the central motor vehicle act. Such advertisement promote unsafe practices.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement, and concluded that the cartoon image of “a delivery boy riding a scooter without helmet” as shown in the advertisement depicts an unsafe practice. This part of the advertisement contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Greendust"
PRODUCT:"Mee Audio Sport-F1 M3P In-ear Headphones"

COMPLAINT:

“Green Dust have been promoting a pair of headphones at an inflated price of Rs 1999 and offering a discount of 82% to the customer to lure them into buying @ rs 350 showing great value for money to the customer. Greendust is trying to con gullible customers by trying to entice customers that they are offering a high quality product at a big discount on its MRP. Whereas the whole advertising is just to con the customer as the actual MRP of the product is much less , and they have inflated the price to fool the gullible buyer.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and a copy of retail invoice provided by the complainant as evidence for his complaint. The CCC noted that the invoice shows the product as “seconds sale” whereas the advertisement is silent on this aspect of the product being a Seconds sale item. The advertisement is misleading the consumers to believe that they are being offered a high quality product at a huge discount on its MRP. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the website communication claiming the MRP of the product as Rs.1999 and offering a Seconds sale at a discounted price of Rs.350, distorts facts and is misleading by omission to mention that it is a seconds sale product. The website advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Shathayu Ayurveda Pvt Ltd."
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Push away those Painful Punches of Migraine Forever. Get A Long Lasting Relief From Migraine.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"https://mobile.twitter.com/shathayu/status/787907587777843200/photo/1 The17th October ad of shathayu on Twitter about migraine appears to be misleading. When shathayu ayurveda days push away from painful punches of migraine FOREVER. FOREVER means a permanent remedy without getting back migraine pain at all. But migraine is a disorder and it is subject to various other conditions like lifestyle, diet and stress levels handled in life. Can shathayu ayurveda please substantiate their claims clearly when they say what they mean by pushing away from powerful punch of migraine FOREVER. Putting any disorder into remission state is not cure or neither FOREVER solution too."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the twitter advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Push away those Painful Punches of Migraine Forever. Get A Long Lasting Relief From Migraine”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence and are misleading by exaggeration. The twitter advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"L’Oreal India Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"LOreal Paris total repair 5 shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

"“Check this ad on TV and you decide whether Aishwarya Rai has really such long hair ?!!! In my view - the basic claim of advertisement is WRONG and misleading. They are claiming something as outcome of product use which is not real and how do you allow them to make fool all consumers. They should put disclaimer that hair used by heroines are dummy and its not real.. The fact is The hair shown by them on celebrity are not REAL they use wigs and claims that hair will be like this if you use this products. MY suggestion is like cigarette - all advertisement must give a disclaimer when actual hair shown by model is NOT REAL. For eg. Many times when every one knows this model has short hair in real life but for product advt they show long hair claims that its because of use that product make this long hair. WHICH IS UNTRUE. why do we allow such unreal claims !!! I request to make this implement ASAP to stop misleading consumer by false adverting”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the TVC does not claim growth of long hair, and the TVC carries disclaimers wherever there are creative visualizations with regards to the ingredients or the efficacy of the product. The CCC concluded that as protagonist (Aishwarya Rai) is not attributing the length of her hair to the product benefit and the length of the protagonist’s hair not being significantly different from what is being depicted, the complaint is NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Marico Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Nihar Shanti Badam Amla Hair Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"“Check this ad on TV and you decide whether vidya balan has really such long hair ?!!! its all fake. In my view - the basic claim of advertisement is WRONG and misleading. They are claiming something as outcome of product use which is not real and how do you allow them to make fool all consumers. They should put disclaimer that hair used by heroines are dummy and its not real. The fact is The hair shown by them on celebrity are not REAL they use wigs and claims that hair will be like this if you use this products. MY suggestion is like cigarette - all advertisement must give a disclaimer when actual hair shown by model is NOT REAL. For eg. Many times when every one knows this model has short hair in real life but for product advt they show long hair claims that its because of use that product make this long hair. WHICH IS UNTRUE. why do we allow such unreal claims !!! I request to make this implement ASAP to stop misleading consumer by false adverting”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the looks of Vidya Balan in the advertisement is not drastically different from her usual persona. A Google search for the images of Vidya Balan reveal photographs of her with a similar look as shown in the advertisement. The CCC concluded that as the protagonist (Vidya Balan) is not attributing the length of her hair to the product benefit and the length of the protagonist’s hair is not significantly different from what is being depicted, the complaint is NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Marico Ltd "
PRODUCT:"New Parachute advance"

COMPLAINT:

"“In real life Deepika do not have such long and volume of hair....its all dummy hair used in advertisement without any disclaimer. In my view - the basic claim of advertisement is WRONG and misleading. They are claiming something as outcome of product use which is not real and how do you allow them to make fool all consumers. They should put disclaimer that hair used by heroines are dummy and its not real. The fact is The hair shown by them on celebrity are not REAL they use wigs and claims that hair will be like this if you use this products. MY suggestion is like cigarette - all advertisement must give a disclaimer when actual hair shown by model is NOT REAL. For eg. Many times when every one knows this model has short hair in real life but for product advt they show long hair claims that its because of use that product make this long hair. WHICH IS UNTRUE. why do we allow such unreal claims !!! I request to make this implement ASAP to stop misleading consumer by false adverting”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the looks of Deepika Padukone in the advertisement is not drastically different from her usual persona. A Google search for the images of Deepika Padukone reveal photographs of her with a similar look as shown in the advertisement. The CCC concluded that as the protagonist (Deepika Padukone) is not attributing the length of her hair to the product benefit, the complaint is NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Swadesh Classes"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Get Government Job in 3 Months”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Rajasthan Patrika) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Get Government Job in 3 Months” was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute in Government firms, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Sarthik Industrial Training Institute"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job, Reputed Company”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Dainik Bhaskar) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job, Reputed Company”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 
 

COMPANY:"Banaras Institute of Engineering & Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement in Reputed Companies”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Amar Ujala) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement in Reputed Companies”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Buddha Institute of Technology (BIT)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. BIT Is No.1 – Best Placement, Best Teacher, Best Labs. 2. We are the 1st in Job Placement in Purvanchal 3. BITS Education Means A Guarantee of Job Placement"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Jagran Prakashan Ltd) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “BIT Is No.1 – Best Placement, Best Teacher, Best Labs” and “We are the 1st in Job Placement in Purvanchal”, were not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove these claims, and are misleading. Claim, “BITS Education Means A Guarantee of Job Placement”, is misleading by implication and exaggeration as it gives an assurance of a job guarantee. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Good Life Wellness Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Good Life Wellness Products"

COMPLAINT:

"1. For Immediate erection and for extra time 2. Make love beyond their Expectations. Claims in the advertisement & the Visual on the Advertisement is in Violation of The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “For immediate erection and for extra time”, was not substantiated with efficacy data, and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims, “For Immediate erection and for extra time”, and “Make love beyond their Expectations”, read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated item 30 of Schedule J Rule 106 of The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Indian fire and Nursing School"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Facility”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Divya Bhaskar) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarathi) as translated in English, “100% Placement Facility”, was not substantiated in the absence of verifiable claim support data, and is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Panipat Institute of Engineering and Technology"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. No.1 Engineering College in North India 2. Awarded Best in Placements 3. No.1 in Placements In North India"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Jagran Prakashan Ltd) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “No.1 Engineering College in North India” and “No.1 in Placements In North India”, were not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove these claims, and are misleading. The claim, “Awarded Best in Placements”, was not substantiated with details, references of the award received such as the year, source and category. Also, the claim is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify the claim. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1, I.2 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Northern Group of Institute-"
PRODUCT:"Northern Institute of Engineering Technical Campus"

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement of Eligible Candidates”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Rajasthan Patrika) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement of Eligible Candidates”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, the criteria used for ascertaining their eligibility, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Raja Baldev Das Birla Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. If you’re suffering from heart problems or if your doctor has advised bypass surgery then opt for Ayurvedic Panchkarma Treatment of Heart Diseases Without Surgery 2. Only Ayurveda (Panchkarma) can help you get rid of Obesity."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Hindustan) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Ayurvedic Panchkarma Treatment of Heart Diseases Without Surgery”, and “Only Ayurveda (Panchkarma) can help you get rid of Obesity”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, specific to the claims related to the treatment of Heart diseases, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 26 under DMR schedule). Also, specific to the claims implying cure for obesity, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 38 under DMR schedule). The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "PMC Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Successful Treatment/ operation for Tumour and Epilepsy. 2. World Class Treatment for Infertility"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Jagran Prakashan Ltd) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Successful Treatment/ operation for Tumour and Epilepsy”, and “World Class Treatment for Infertility”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Also, specific to the claims related to the treatment for Tumor, Epilepsy, and Infertility, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (items 51, 17, 48 under the DMR schedule). . The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Arcot Sri Mahalakshmi Women’s College"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“No 1 college”, “100 % Placement” Voice Over Says, ""After Completion Of Degree You Will Get 100% Job"""

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No.1 college”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. The claim, “100% Placement” and voiceover claim, "After Completion Of Degree You Will Get 100% Job", were not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claims are misleading by gross exaggeration. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Dexter Academy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Tamil Nadu s No. 1 competitive examination coaching institute”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Tamil Nadu’s No. 1 competitive examination coaching institute”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by gross exaggeration. The TVC contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"J & J DeChane Laboratories Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Livactin-G"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Keep illness at bay with Livactin-G everyday. 2. Improves moods, increases cognitive functions, rejuvenates vitality, relives stress, boosts memory, stops symptoms of ageing, treats insomnia 3. Tested & Trusted Ayurvedic Medicines"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Keep illness at bay with Livactin-G everyday”, “Improves moods, increases cognitive functions, rejuvenates vitality, relives stress, boosts memory, stops symptoms of ageing, treats insomnia”, and “Tested & Trusted Ayurvedic Medicines”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Positive Homeopathy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Complete disease cure with Nano pills for the first time across the world using advanced nano medicine and genetic method – Diabetes – Piles - PCOD - Rheumatoid Arthritis The claims in the advertisement appear to be in Violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Complete disease cure with Nano pills for the first time across the world using advanced nano medicine and genetic method – Diabetes – Piles - PCOD - Rheumatoid Arthritis”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by gross exaggeration. Specific to the claims related to complete cure for Diabetes the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act ((item 9 under DMR schedule). Also specific to the claims related to complete cure for Piles, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated Schedule J (item 42) Rule 106 of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Shakshii Wellness"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“1. It is quick, safe and reliable method, to do away with stubborn pockets of fat that pose as a real struggle for any individual. It helps one get back in shape instantly. 2. Treatment is very quick and one walks in for a sitting and walks out lighter. 3. HOW DID ACTRESS NAMITA SHED ALMOST 30KGS? Its not just Namita, we have 100's of clients who have managed the same achievement. Misleading before and after Visual”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “It is quick, safe and reliable method, to do away with stubborn pockets of fat that pose as a real struggle for any individual. It helps one get back in shape instantly”, “Treatment is very quick and one walks in for a sitting and walks out lighter”, “How Did Actress Namita Shed Almost 30kgs?”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence. The claim, “we have 100's of clients who have managed the same achievement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting evidence such as detailed list of customers with contact details who have been benefitted by the treatment. Also, the claims and efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Akanksha Ayurveda & Panchakarma"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“1 Reduce upto 4-8 Kg in just 10 days 2 Reduce 30-60 kg additional weight -  Without any Walking  Without any Side Effect  Without any crash Dieting 3 Permanent freedom from piles, fissure with Ointment (Aushadi Lep) The before and after visuals in the advertisement are misleading The claims in the advertisement appear to be in Violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Reduce upto 4-8 Kg in just 10 days”, “Reduce 30-60 kg additional weight - Without any Walking - Without any Side Effect - Without any crash Dieting”, “Permanent freedom from piles, fissure with Ointment (Aushadi Lep)”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure/treatment for Piles, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated Schedule J (Item 42) Rule 106 of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945. Also, reference to obesity (“motapa, ab kaisi samasya”), the advertisement is misleading by implication that the treatment would solve the problem of obesity and therefore is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 3 under DMR schedule). Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Perfect Point"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Freedom from big waist, high blood pressure, high cholesterol etc. 2. Earlier my weight was 93 kilos and even after dieting as well weight has not been reduced. With Cavi Lipo’s treatment at Perfect Point I have lost 54 inches, 23 kilos.” The before and after visuals in the advertisement are misleading. The claims in the advertisement appear to be in Violation of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Freedom from big waist, high blood pressure, high cholesterol etc”, and the testimonial claim, “Earlier my weight was 93 kilos and even after dieting as well weight has not been reduced. With Cavi Lipo’s treatment at Perfect Point I have lost 54 inches, 23 kilos”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure for high blood pressure, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (Item 27 under DMR Schedule). Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Care Institute of Medical Sciences"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Most experienced and largest cardiology and cardiovascular group practice since 20 years in India. 2. Highest and oldest experienced cardiac ''team'' in western India."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Most experienced and largest cardiology and cardiovascular group practice since 20 years in India”, and “Highest and oldest experienced cardiac ''team'' in western India”, were not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove these claims. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Goodlife Wellness "
PRODUCT:""

COMPLAINT:

"1. GOODLIFE - Reduce Weight without medicine & machine...With Naturopathy Cereals. 100% GUARANTEE 2. Goodlife weight loss Plan is 100% Slim at home programme. 3. No need of any medicine, Machine, Exercise. 4. No need of dieting too. You can eat routine supplements. 5. Reduce 20 kg weight till 12 November 16 6. Reduce 20 kg weight till 13 January 16"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Gujarathi), as translated in English, “GOODLIFE - Reduce Weight without medicine & machine...With Naturopathy Cereals”, “100% Guarantee”, “Goodlife weight loss Plan is 100% Slim at home programme”, “No need of any medicine, Machine, Exercise”, “No need of dieting too. You can eat routine supplements”, “Reduce 20 kg weight till 12 November 16”, “Reduce 20 kg weight till 13 January 16”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Blizz Biosculpting "
PRODUCT:""

COMPLAINT:

"1. No Belly Before Diwali 2. XXX to M Before and After visual in the advertisement are misleading."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “No Belly Before Diwali” and “XXX to M” were not substantiated with supporting evidence, and claims as well as efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Amazon India"
PRODUCT:"HTC Desire 620G Dual Sim"

COMPLAINT:

“Increased the MRP more than that on the Box from Manufacturer by around 50 percentage and then saying a discount of 51 percentage By this they are misleading the customers. Post the delivery of the product. Amazon is not ready to take the responsibility of the price change and to perform any action on the discrepancy product. I purchased the Item on 1st October 2016 at around 11 AM with 49% discount on product, and it was delivered before 8 PM on same day. Post the Delivery got to know about the MRP Discrepancy and hence took Screenshot at that time showing the discount 51%. Post which I have Called and wrote mails to Amazon Support. But Amazon Support telling it is not responsible for the MRP Discrepancy. By this they are Just showing false Discount to Customers and making customer think that Amazon giving great offer!! Kindly look into this Higher MRP Discrepancy by Amazon and its Sellers. ”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser (Amazon Seller Services P. Ltd) was approached by ASCI for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. Amazon did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered Amazon’s response. Amazon argues that the product, the MRP, the Offer Price and the product description and title are listed by the independent seller directly and Amazon has no direct control over the particulars of the listing. Amazon only provides a platform to independent sellers to advertise their products and further provide logistic support inter alia money transactions, warehousing and delivery. Therefore, misrepresentation, if any, has been made by the independent seller and not by Amazon. The CCC noted that the consumer has seen the product advertisement offering discount on the Amazon website and the transaction for purchase also has taken place between the consumer and Amazon. Based on the evidence provided by the complainant, the CCC concluded that the website communication claiming the MRP of the product as Rs.14,900 is false. The advertisement offering at the discounted price of Rs.7375, when the actual MRP of the product is Rs.9990, distorts facts and is therefore misleading the consumers as to actual discount being offered. The Website communication contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "The Nilgiri Dairy Farm Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Nilgiris Golden Bakes Cookies –Almond & Choco- chip"

COMPLAINT:

"I would like to make a complaint. With reference to my tweet on the matter. Nilgiris packaging of the Golden Bakes Cookies - Almond & Choco-Chip is misleading. The actual product doesn't look like the picture at all and hardly even has a chocolate chip in it"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their Advocates along with the product sample. Advocate on behalf of the advertiser argues that it is practically impossible to depict the exact picture of the product on the package in every case, and hence, their client has used a representative picture on the package. The CCC viewed the visuals on the product packaging, referred to the actual product sample provided by the advertiser and considered the Advocate’s response. The CCC observed that the visuals on the product pack depict a significant quantity of choco chips and the actual products has much less quantity than depicted on pack. Based on the review of the actual product sample submitted by the Advocate versus visual on its packaging, the CCC concluded that the visual representation of choco chip quantity on the product packaging is misleading by implication. The disclaimer "Only a pictorial depiction, actual cookie inside may differ", is attempting to correct a misleading claim presented by way of a visual as the packaging visual differs from the actual product being sold. The product packaging contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code as well as ASCI guidelines on Disclaimers. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Sujatha Bio Tech"
PRODUCT:"Memory Vita Focus Factor"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “Memory Vita Focus Factor - World's First Intelligence Beverage Drink & Breakfast Cereals” “Memory Vita- 2. -Reduces Stress - Improves mental alertness - Increase focus - Increases memory - Increases immunity” Packaging Claims: “WORLD’S 1ST MEMORY ENHANCING DRINK & BEVERAGE” 1. “90Day Money Back Challenge” 2. “World’s First Intelligence Drink”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Memory Vita - Reduces Stress - Improves mental alertness - Increase focus - Increases memory - Increases immunity”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy and are misleading by exaggeration. Advertisement claim, “World's First Intelligence Beverage Drink & Breakfast Cereals”, Pack claims, “World’s 1st Memory Enhancing Drink & Beverage”, and “World’s First Intelligence Drink”, were not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar health drinks worldwide in the same category to prove that the advertiser’s product is the “world’s first”, and are misleading by exaggeration. Pack claim, “90 Day Money Back Challenge”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of the customers who were refunded with the money back if not benefitted as claimed, and is misleading. The advertisement and the pack claims contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Kongu Herbal Chicken (P) Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Kongu Herbal Chicken (P) Ltd"

COMPLAINT:

“India’s First Certified Antibiotic Free Chicken”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their Advocates. Advocate on behalf of the advertiser states that their client’s chickens are provided with an organic feed and because of this all the chickens are grown without any chemical supplements. Also, their client has made a detailed market research all over India to find out the companies that are doing chemical and antibiotic free chicken and as per the report there is no other antibiotic free chicken. As claim support data, the Advocate on behalf of the advertiser provided test reports certified by recognised laboratories. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and the print advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the test reports confirm that Kongu Herbal chicken meat samples that were tested are free from antibiotics. Based on this data, and in the absence of any data contrary to the claim of “India’s first” being made, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s First Certified Antibiotic Free Chicken”, was substantiated. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Mystic Aromatics "
PRODUCT:"Areca Tea"

COMPLAINT:

"“1. Anti-Diabetic – Anti-Oxidant – Anti Ulcer 2. Anti-Ageing"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that Areca Tea contains 80% of Areca Nut Extract and 20% of few Ayurvedic herbs. Areca Tea bags contain processed Areca granules with ayurvedic herbs brewed into a healthy concoction of anti-oxidants, digestive enzyme enhancing agents and aqueous tannin. As claim support data, the advertiser provided journal references/review articles on Pharmacological activities of Areca catechu Linn. The CCC noted that the advertiser asserts product benefits based on some literature references specific to Areca Nut however, did not provide any clinical evidence of product efficacy in its tea format for the anticipated dosage. The CCC concluded that the claims (in Malayalam) as translated in English, “Anti-Diabetic – Anti-Oxidant – Anti Ulcer”, “Anti-Ageing”, were not substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Xavier University Bhubaneswar"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"""Outstanding 100% placement records"" ""29 years of excellence in management education"""

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 1: Many educational institutions have been regularly publishing misleading advertisements in newspapers promising 100% placement or hike in salary. Xavier University Bhubaneswar Published in the front page of Sambad, Bhubaneswar edition on 05.09.2016 ""Outstanding 100% placement records"" I enclose the news cutting for your perusal and necessary action. Complaint 2: I had, by my letter dated 28.09.2016, brought to your notice a misleading advertisement by Xavier University, Bhubaneswar harping on 100 placement. Similar advertisement has again been published in the Bhubaneswar edition of The Samaja on 4th October, 2016 at page 5 emphasising ""Outstanding 100 placement records"". The news cutting is enclosed. It may be clarified here that Xavier Institute of Management, Bhubaneswar (XIMB) had received wide acclaim as a standalone institute. It was converted to Xavier University Bhubaneswar in 2013. The instant advertisement highlights Xavier School of Human Resource Management (XaHR), Xavier School of Rural Management (XSRM), Xavier School of Sustainability (XSOS), Xavier School of Communication XCOMM), and Xavier School of Commerce (XSC), in addition to XIMB. These new schools, viz. XaHR, XSRM, X505, XOMM, and XSC have been set up recently and their students have not faced the recruitment process. incidentally, XSC offers bachelor degree programmes (B.Com and BBM), for which no placement is provided by any university in India. So the claim of ""Outstanding 100 placement records"", which may be true to some extent for XIMB, is completely false for these new schools. What is more, the byline of the advertisement is ""29 years of excellence in management education"". This may be true in respect of XIMB, which has completed 28 years. However, this claim is completely false in respect of the new schools mentioned above."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the Advertiser provided placement data published as press releases during the last three years (March 2014, March 2015 and March 2016). The press release copies were not considered to be acceptable as claim support. The CCC concluded that the claim, ""Outstanding 100% placement records"", was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The claim, ""29 years of excellence in management education"", was not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Orane Institute of Beauty & Wellness"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Largest network of beauty and wellness Institutes in Delhi-Punjab-Chandigarh-Gujarat-Rajasthan-Haryana-Himachal Pradesh” “100% Job Assistance” “Beauty Professionals Earning Equivalent to Doctors”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Largest network of beauty and wellness Institutes in Delhi-Punjab-Chandigarh-Gujarat-Rajasthan-Haryana-Himachal Pradesh” “100% Job Assistance” “Beauty Professionals Earning Equivalent to Doctors”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisements and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser asserts that they have 60+ state-of-the-art academies in the mentioned locations and this is indeed the largest network that any brand has in beauty education industry. In this industry, many professionals are earning in lacs per month which is more than doctors. The advertiser has got a dedicated placement department which is responsible for the placement of each and every deserving candidate and of recent they have placed hundreds of students. As claim support data, the advertiser’s response mentioned list of various awards received by them. The CCC reviewed the data and concluded that – The claim, “Largest network of beauty and wellness Institutes in Delhi-Punjab-Chandigarh-Gujarat-Rajasthan-Haryana-Himachal Pradesh”, was not substantiated with comparative data to prove that they have the largest network than others in beauty education industry, or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. For the claim, “100% Job Assistance”, the CCC noted that the use of “100%” numerical is not relevant for “job assistance” claim, and is misleading by implication. Claim, ""Beauty Professionals earning equivalent to Doctors"", was not substantiated with supporting evidence to prove that by and large whether beauty professionals are drawing salary equal to that of doctors. The claim is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"One97 Communications Ltd (PayTM)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Get Upto 100% Cashback”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint no.1 “They are doing false advertising of 100% csshback, where as they are giving maximum cash back of Rs 1000 with condition of flight ticket amount to be 2500. So from where is the language justified, 100% of 2500 is never 1000 when they are starting there booking from 2500? There terms and conditions are: ""All users get 100% Cashback upto 1000 on flight ticket bookings. Applicable on minimum order value of Rs 2500"" They are misleading consumers once they reach to book ticket with false statements. This should be stopped. https://paytm.com/offer/flight-tickets/ Flyfree offer of paytm is totally unjustified. This hampers the consumer interests, misleading content.” Complaint no.2 “Appy FLYFREE coupon. Get 100% cashback. Terms and Conditions mentioned. Chance to win. For 10 lucky draw winners. I saw the (chance to win) after I booked the flight in order completion page. Now I can't even cancel. Flight cancellation charges will be deducted. Upto 1000. When there isn't any flight which cost less than 1000. Bloodly cheaters.” Complaint no.3 “On Oct 6, Paytm published a full-page ad on the front page of Hindustan times, the text of which is as follows: Paytm Launching Flight Booking on Paytm! Get upto 100% Cashback from 6-8 Oct Promo Code: FLYFREE (there were some other text and visuals) *T&C Apply When I visited Paytm website and tried to book a flight, I found that the maximum cashback is only INR 1000/- No such T&C was mentioned in the HT newspaper ad. This is the first evidence of the Newpaper ad being misleading. Thereafter, when I tried to find flights that priced up to INR 1000, I came across Delhi-Jaipur flight, priced at INR 909. Upon booking this flight with the FLYFREE promo code, I got the following error message ""Extra Rs denifednudenifednu0 Paytm wallet loyalty cashback."" This error message essentially means, I didn't get any cashback. So, this provides evidence that not only the HT Newpaper Ad but the Ad and T&C put up on Paytm website, both are misleading. I have taken screenshots of the above mentioned transactions and observations, which can be produced if required.”"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print and the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the terms and conditions followed for this offer specifically mentioned that Cashback amount will be Rs.1000 on ordering flight tickets above the value of Rs.2500. Also, the cashback will be given of Rs.1000 and not at par with booking amount. Advertiser provided a list of 30 customers randomly selected by them as lucky winners during the offer period of 3 days. The CCC noted that the print advertisement carries a disclaimer to indicate that the offer is subject to Terms and Conditions “T&C apply”, and in the website advertisement the disclaimer reads as “T*C apply. Max cashback upto Rs.1000”. The CCC concluded that the claim offer of “Get upto 100% cashback from 6-8 Oct”, is not misleading as it is qualified in the advertisement as being subject to terms and conditions. The complaints were NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"RICS School of Built Environment Amity University"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“We Promise. We deliver. 100% Placements Yet Again"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Many educational institutions have been regularly publishing misleading advertisements in newspapers promising 100% placement or hike in salary. Amity University Published in page 1 of Education Times, Times of India on 30.05.2016 ""We Promise. We deliver. 100% Placements Yet Again"" I enclose the news cutting for your perusal and necessary action."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claim is based on their current academic year end placements. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a list of students and their placement details which includes their companies and date of joining. Advertiser was further requested to submit additional data, to which no additional details were submitted by the advertiser. Based on the information submitted, the CCC concluded that the claim, “We Promise. We deliver. 100% Placements Yet Again", was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as details and evidence of the batch size, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Koustuv Technical Campus Koustuv Institute of Self-Domain & College of Engg"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement is Guaranteed”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Many educational institutions have been regularly publishing misleading advertisements in newspapers promising 100% placement or hike in salary. Some such examples are given below. Koustuv Institute of Self Domain and College of Engineering Bhubaneswar Published in the front page of Samaja, Bhubaneswar edition on 14.05.2016 ""100% Placement is Guaranteed"" I enclose the news cutting for your perusal and necessary action.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response post the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that they intended to claim “100% job assurance” but by error claimed “100% Placement is guaranteed”. The advertiser did not provide any supporting data as to how they assure 100% job. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement is Guaranteed”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration as the advertiser gives a guarantee of 100% placement. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY:"DRIEMS Group Of Institutions- DRIEMS School of Hotel Management"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Placement Assured”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Many educational institutions have been regularly publishing misleading advertisements in newspapers promising 100% placement or hike in salary. Some such examples are given below. DRIEMS School of Hotel Management Published in the back page of Samaja, Bhubaneswar edition on 01.05.2016 ""100% Placement Assured"" I enclose the news cutting for your perusal and necessary action.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that their aim is to impart world class training in hospitality sector in coordination with many National and International chain of hotels in India. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data regarding the placements achieved by them. The CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Placement Assured”, was not substantiated with verifiable claim support data and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Lenovo India Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Moto E3 Power"

COMPLAINT:

“I am attaching flipkart advt in Mumbai Times of India. Dated 20.09.2016. Based on advt i placed order for motorola phone. But when i spoke to customer care, to my surprise they said they wl not be sending me reliance jio sim card with this phone... I feel being cheated by this misleading advt in national newspaper. Kindly look into this matter”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"ASCI approached the concerned advertiser (Lenovo India P. Ltd) for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. They were also offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the advertisement clearly mentions that a purchaser of a Moto E3 Power would be entitled to the JIO Welcome Offer and does not indicate that the phone will come bundled with the SIM. Advertisement calls out that one should visit www.flipkart.com for details in the mandatories section. The CCC noted that the advertisement is a joint promotion offer and Moto E3 Power phone is eligible for Jio Welcome Offer as it is 4G compatible. The CCC concluded that the advertisement is not misleading as it is subject to terms and conditions as mentioned in the disclaimer, which clarifies that to avail the offer one has to follow the steps as provided at Jio Welcome Offer Page. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Trendsutra Platform Services Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Pepperfry.com"

COMPLAINT:

"Total no. of Complaints: 2 Complaint no.1 The ad says that you can rerun a sofa if it does not fit in your home. http://youtu.be/kXJ_2avumqI The ad does not show any terms or conditions. Ho ever on site it mentioned that a product can be retuned only if it is damaged or manufacturing defect. Complaint no.2 In advertisement they clearly show that bed is getting return because size is not accurate. In reality pepperfry dont have cancellation policy at all and also they only return product if it is damaged."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing but discussed the complaint via telecom and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that their policies towards their vendors are clear in stating that in the event the products sold by them do not conform to the specifications provided (by them) for display on the Website, or the products are damaged in any manner, or any incorrect products are delivered by the vendor, then the vendor is liable to accept that such products may be returned by the customers. The CCC noted that the TVC shows the product (sofa) being returned as it did not fit in the space available and gives an impression that it was customer’s mistake. The advertisement does not clearly say that it is the mistake of the vendor. Further, the TVC does not clarify that the product can be returned only if it is damaged or defective or not as per specification as advertised. The claim in the TVC “Easy Returns”, read in conjunction with the voiceover “if there is a problem, we will take it back”, is therefore misleading by ambiguity. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Amplifon India Pvt Ltd (Amplifon)"
PRODUCT: ""

COMPLAINT:

“Hearing loss is easy to deal with. A fall isn’t. People with hearing loss are thrice more prone to fractures due to falling. Hearing loss can throw you out of balance. Literally. The balance system in the inner ear helps you to walk, run, and move without falling. The loss of hearing can increase the risk of falling up to three times.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The Advertisement in Times of India dated: 09th September, 2016 States that Hearing loss is easy to deal with A fall isn't. Advertisement mentions that hearing loss can cause imbalance. Ear structure has two components namely Cochlea and nerve for hearing deciphering sound and Labyrinth for body balance which does not take part in hearing. So the advt mentioning that the loss of hearing increases the risk of falling up to three times. This is totally misguiding frightening the patients and nothing but sale gimmick. It should be stopped immediately for the benefit of patients.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided research articles related to Hearing Loss and risk of Falls. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of the ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that that the advertiser did not conclusively and quantitatively prove that diminished hearing in people with hearing hearing loss can lead to falls three times more than normal individuals. The CCC concluded that the claims, “People with hearing loss are thrice more prone to fractures due to falling. The loss of hearing can increase the risk of falling up to three times”, were inadequately substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Vedant Fashions Private Limited"
PRODUCT: "Manyavar"

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint No.1 “Manyavar Virat Kohli - Diwali (Brand Film, 2016) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6MGNW7hKL8 The Adv ridicules the Gluten Free Biscuit saying ... Gluten Free Biscuits in Diwali Hamper Ehh....Gluten free is medical necessity of persons suffering from Celiac Disease as currently there is no other treatment except to survive on strict Gluten Free Food.” Complaint No.2 “This advertisement describes that how doing the traditional things and wearing traditional clothes makes one come into Diwali mood and feel. The advertisement starts with Virat Kohli discarding Gluten Free biscuits and making a face at the mention of eating them. My 4 year old son is a patient of celiac disease and has to be life long on gluten free foods. Since he saw this advertisement, and that too from his favourite cricketer, he has refused to eat gluten free foods condemning their taste and wants 'traditional' foods, many of which are wheat based. This ad, therefore, is highly insensitive and has created life threatening problems at my home”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC concluded that in the context of the advertisement which describes the indulgences that people enjoy during festive occasions, Virat Kohli saying “Gluten Free Biscuits Diwali hamper main.. hhut” is not objectionable. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bridgestone India Private Limited"
PRODUCT: "Ecopia Tyres"

COMPLAINT:

“While shopping online for tyres, I cam across this claim on the ecopia.bridgestone.co.in website which said "I emit lesser CO@, so you breathe easy. Really dont understand how a tyre can help you breathe easy and save the environment. This does not seem like responsible communication from a globally reputed company."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. Advertiser did not respond by the extended due date. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of specific comments with claim support data from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, "I emit lesser CO2 so you breathe easy”, was not substantiated. There was no reference to what the comparison is being made versus and whether the contribution of lesser emission of the advertised tyres is statistically significant or valid over the life period of the tyre in use to make such a claim or call the product as “ecofriendly. Also the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Bhavishi Fertility Institute "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“Assurance of Complete family, why should any couple remain childless?”, “Best in the world and India”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of two days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing and submitted their response post the extended due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the claims,“Ashwasan Purna Kutumbache” and “Kontehi Jodte Apatyavina Ka Rahnar?” are not in violation of the provisions of the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954. The claim, “Bharat Ani Jagat Sarvottam” should be read and interpreted in connection with various methods of treatment available in the World and in India which are considered to be the best methods of treatments. The CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide any claim support data for the advertised claims of assuring a child for any couple and assurance of complete family. The CCC concluded that the headline claims (in Marathi), “Ashwasan Purna Kutumbache. Kontehi Jodte Apatyavina Ka Rahnar?” (“Assurance of Complete family, why should any couple remain childless?”) read in conjunction with the visual showing a couple with a child and the descriptor of the name of the institution “Vandhyatwa Nivaran Sansthan”, is misleading as it implies assurance of a child to any couple and guaranteed cure for infertility, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 48 under the DMR schedule). The CCC noted that the claim, “Bharat Ani Jagat Sarvottam” (“Best in the world and India”) does not appear to be a descriptor of the treatment modalities. The claim appears in close proximity to the text providing information on the New Mumbai branch. The claim was not substantiated with any supporting details as well. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Bajaj Auto Ltd "
PRODUCT: "Bajaj Pulsar "

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint No.1: Pulsar -15 years of thrilling India advertisement on TV channels clearly violate traffic rules by performing stunts on the roads. and public places Spotted on the TV channel. Complaint No.2: New Bajaj Pulsar showing wheeling stunts. We all know the problems we face due to wheeling by our youngsters. There are countless tragic stories to this menace. The warning is so small, no body can read it & it is just an eye wash to fool the people. This add should be immediately stopped as it is misguiding the youth.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the stunts were performed by experts under a controlled environment and not on the road and there is no reference to real road conditions i.e. people and traffic. The CCC noted that the rider is shown performing stunts in normal streets, market, traffic conditions – wheelie being shown in multiple places, including right amongst a group of people dancing. This is contradictory to the disclaimer made in the TVC – “These stunts have been performed under controlled environment at an isolated location”. The CCC concluded that regardless of the disclaimer, the specific visuals showing the stunts performed by the rider in normal traffic and/or in presence of bystanders and public encourages dangerous practices, manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code, and Clauses a and b of the Guidelines on Advertisements for Automotive Vehicles. The complaints were UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Anchor Health & Beauty Care Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"New Anchor health plus"

COMPLAINT:

“India’s first soap with power of sanitizer”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“1) Ad of New Anchor Health + declares Indias first soap with power of sanitizer, without declaring the name of the sanitizer. The soap is for bath and kill harmful germs bacteria causing several diseases. New Anchor Health + gives protection from germs bacteria better compared with soap without the sanitizer. How can New Anchor Health + claim to be Indias first soap with power of sanitizer? To be on safer side they have not declared the name of the sanitizer. This is cheating the consumer with false and wrong information and withholding the real and important fact keeping the consumer in confusion. 2) New Anchor Health + is not the first soap with power of sanitizer so it must not misguide the consumer with false information and rank their product as first when similar other products are available in the market.."""

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their advocates. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advocate’s response on behalf of the Advertiser. Advocate states that the said claim is true as there is no other bathing Soap which has made the claim with 'Power of Sanitizer' available in the Indian Market. Also, the claim is on the basis that the active ingredients used in the product helps in killing 99% Germs in 30 seconds in controlled laboratory conditions. The CCC noted that the advertiser, has only given assertions about product content and its efficacy but has not provided any evidence of product performance. The advertiser argues that they are the first to “claim” power of sanitizer. The CCC did not agree with this argument given that there are many well known products available in the market that contain germicidal ingredients and a consumer is likely to be misled by such ambiguous claim. The CCC concluded that the claim (in Gujarathi) as translated in English, “India’s first soap with power of sanitizer”, was not substantiated with technical tests/trials report, and with comparative data versus other similar soaps in the same category. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bharti Airtel Ltd "
PRODUCT:"My Airtel app"

COMPLAINT:

"“In the new airtel ad, where a competition is held for downloadin wide variety of app from music, cinema, books, Airtel girl just downloads one app (Myairtelapp) and says every app is downloaded. In actual sense, once myairtel app is downloaded, it is required to download each app separately through it. Ad is misleading and makes people think app is a multipurpose app whereas it is more like a app store”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the TVC clearly and simply reflects the benefits of downloading My Airtel app i.e. The app provides various services and acts as a gateway for variety of apps and the customer would not have to visit different links for downloading various app’s. The CCC noted that the TVC states ‘Download my airtel app – music, movies, TV, backup. Meri saari duniya ka shortcut’ and concluded that the TVC is not misleading as the app provide a download all option as well for various Airtel services. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Emami Limited"
PRODUCT:"Keshking"

COMPLAINT:

“The said Advt is published in VIVA supliment of Loksatta , Mumbai edition on 14/10/2016. It showed photo of a girl with shoulder length short hair as before & with waist length long hair as after with description of using oil & shampoo for two years. The growth in two years is impossible & seems deceptive. The Advt is deceptive”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the testimonial provided by one of their consumers was produced in the advertisement. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the communication from the Consumer along with the permission provided by her for using the said testimonial for advertisement purpose. The CCC noted that apart from the single consumer testimonial, the advertiser did not provide any technical rationale for the product benefit of stopping hair loss and enhance significant hair growth as claimed in the testimonial / depicted in the advertisement nor any other clinical evidence for the product efficacy as implied. The testimonial provided of one individual as supporting proof was not considered to be adequate by the CCC and authenticity of the consumer’s claim was not verifiable by any other evidence – photographic or otherwise. The CCC concluded that the claim is not adequately substantiated with authentic evidence and the efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the usage of the product is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Cleartrip Pvt Ltd (Cleartrip)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"“There is a recent TV ad from cleatrip which talks about how in today's world airprices are rising & people's schedule is not fixed. It shows a couple where the husband's BP shoots up due the above issue. And hence their new feature of pricelock which allows the customer to lock air prices and pay later once their travel schedule is confirmed. Its benefit being that if you buy tickets now & your trip gets cancelled, you lose the airfare. Also, if you delay buying the tickets, the prices would rise and the fare would be expensive. In either situation the customer is in financial loss. And hence Clear Trip's new feature of pricelock which allows the customer to lock air prices and pay later once their travel schedule is confirmed would help the customers to have a relaxed booking process with no negative financial impact. I had been impressed by the Ad & the feature advertised had been the discussion of our office as well. For a recent trip, instead of my usual booking option, I thought I would opt for Clear Trip since the price lock feature would help me. But to my utter shock & dismay, I read in the T & C that there is i) a non-refundable fee (which varies as per flight option) ii) The price lock is available (prices are held) only for a specific period (which varies as per flight option) My complaint is 1) The ad is grossly misleading. It mentions neither of the above 2 factors. It goes against Truthful and Honest to consumers. 2) The prices being charges are exorbitant. (refer attachment) For an airfare of 7,052/-, the lock-in fee which is additional to the airfare is 2,170/- which is almost 28% of the airfare 3) The period for which the prices are being held is only 1 day! The advt is totally unfair & the image it presents is absolutely incorrect.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the Price Lock Fee is introduced for ensuring savings to the customer and is a voluntary option to the Customer. At no time, the customer is compelled to opt for Price Lock. If the customer feels that the pricing is high, he/she may choose to not opt for Price Lock and proceed to book the flight as per his requirement. As claim support data, the advertiser provided the terms and conditions applicable for the price lock policy. The CCC noted that the claim offer (voice over in the TVC), “Lock a flight for today and pay only if your plan is confirmed. Even if the fare increases you still pay only the locked fare”, does not state that the user has to pay an additional non-refundable Price lock fee to lock the flight fare. The CCC concluded that the TVC is misleading by omission of information that Lock in feature is subject to several terms and conditions. The TVC contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Accelyst Solutions Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Freecharge"

COMPLAINT:

"“Just pay with Freecharge for minimum Rs. 100 at any of our partners & get 100% cashback on your next recharge/bill payment."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Extremely misleading ad. While on one hand there is a big graphic saying 100% CASHBACK, the email subject says 100% cashback, the website says 100% cashback. Then there is a smaller text which says max Rs 50. What in the world is the meaning of an ad which is 100% cashback, to a limit of Rs 50. As if Rs 50 is a large value for a bill payment in today's age.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the Ad – promotional material and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the average recharge amount on their platform is around Rs.75. Hence Rs.50 cashback on that is a good offer and not misleading. The CCC noted that while the advertisement claims 100% cashback, in smaller text it says, “Max cashback Rs.50”. The CCC did not agree with the advertiser’s argument that Rs 50 is a good offer to claim 100% Cashback as the average recharge as stated by the advertiser himself is Rs 75. The CCC concluded that the claim offer, “100% cashback on recharges/bill payments. Just pay with Freecharge for minimum Rs.100 at any of our partners”, is misleading as the cashback being offered is limited to Rs.50/-. The advertisement – promotional material contravened Chapter I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Aditya Birla Management Corporation P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Idea Cellular"

COMPLAINT:

"“Recieved SMS from Idea on number 9814606651 "ek jaroori suchna! abhi call karen 53111 aur payen 50 Rs ka free recharge."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“On dialing 53111 they started asking quiz questions, after some time when they keep on asking questions, I realized that something is wrong, i cancelled the call , there was an SMS from idea in which my 34 Rs were deducted for participating in a quiz. IDEA is befooling there customers by luring them for recharge and then deducting there balance.”

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement – promo SMS and the evidence provided by the complainant. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim offer, "ek jaroori suchna! abhi call karen 53111 aur payen 50 Rs ka free recharge”, is false and misleading by omission as the free recharge was not being offered to every caller but subject to certain terms and conditions. The advertisement - SMS contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Lico Group"
PRODUCT:"Licostyle Shoes"

COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 1- “I want to bring into your kind notice about this shoe ad of Licostyle published in Times Life, supplement on page 3 of Times of India on Sunday , 23rd October. I find this ad demeaning to women and request ASCI to take this forward with the Licostyle. In a society, where women are fighting for their right to equality, even thinking of such ad is obnoxious. Kindly raise our concern against the same.” Complaint 2- “Advert for men's shoes. There are a pair of legs of the man that appear from the knee down. There is a woman half sitting, half lying on the floor, hugging his leg. He has placed one foot over her lap. It is highly degrading to women. Treats her as nothing better than a rug or a stool. It's very derogatory & sends a very bad, misogynistic message to the readers. It also portrays this behaviour as classy & acceptable” Complaint 3- “ A high profile man wearing the shoes and standing with his feet on an equally high profile corporate woman's thigh. And the Woman embracing the Mans legs. I feel the portrayal of the brand demeans women and outrages the genders dignity at large, where it's ok to treat a woman by treating her in a way where a 'MAN' can have the 'POWER' of doing so... I think it's unfair, disrespectful and misses the point of Gender equality.” Complaint 4- “woman shown as slave , demeaning the woman as cheap ..extremely bad taste of this client and agency who have come up with such idea, must be stopped immediately from all media. stop this ad from all media coverage and ban this ad too !” Complaint 5- “Extremely sexist ad which denigrates women. Extremely sexist ad of a shoe leather company- AbZorb Force. Such ads are derogatory to women and should not be Allowed Please note that below Complaints are received against the Print Advertisement of ""Lico Group- Licostyle shoes"" which is said to have appeared in Times of India Complaint 6- “Saw this on the Sunday TOI 23rd October. I believe It is derogatory to women. The ad should be taken off with an apology in print” Complaint 7- “Came across this Regressive , Chauvinistic Advt in Today's TOI life Supplement ...It's shocking and disturbing to see Shoes being advertised thus ! In this day and age !Request you to kindly look into it” Complaint 8- “Shocking and sad ! In this day and age advt for shoe like this !!!Thank God ...his foot is not on her head ! In TOI Life section Bengaluru edition today. Product manufacturer , Advt Agency and the News Paper ... All of them need to be hauled up for their collaborative insensitivity !” Complaint 9- “In today's Times of India Bangalore - Life Supplement there is an ad by a shoe company that is very shocking. It is shocking and disturbing to see a brand in today's time sending across such a derogatory message with respect to women.” Complaint 10- “Ad in Sunday edition of times life. Toi is deragatory to women” Complaint 11- “Came across this Regressive , Chauvinistic Advt in Today's TOI life Supplement ...Very derogatory advertisement” Complaint 12- “This is to do with this derogatory advertising in Toi today. Please do not encourage such advertisements as it is complete male chauvinism. Request you to not post them and fine such companies. Hoping you will take action as soon as possible. Thanking you” Complaint 13- “came across this demeaning advertisement in last Sunday's TOI WEEKEND SUPPLEMENT. I found it quite offending as it shOws women in a pretty low status , sitting at d feet of her master n d man is standing with pride with her shoe on her thigh appearing as if she is a trophy or a slave.I object to this n wish to lodge a complaint against this brand Licostyle, its ad agency n also TOI for not being considerate enough towards hurting our sentiments by publishing such pervasive content.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainants. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for these complaints. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and concluded that the visual showing “a woman sitting on the floor and the man putting his shoe clad foot on her lap ”, is demeaning and derogatory to women, and is likely to cause grave and widespread offence. The advertisement contravened Chapters II and III.1 (b ) of the ASCI Code. The complaints were UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"ANI Technologies Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"OLA Cabs"

COMPLAINT:

“Happy100 offer OLA- Ride anywhere in Mumbai for just Rs. 100! This entire week use code HAPPY100 and pay just Rs. 100 for all your rides between 11am & 5pm. T & C apply.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“This offer was grossly misleading. The obvious intent of the advertisement is to mislead the customer into thinking that he can take a ride as far as he likes within mumbai for the cost of 100 rupees. The terms and conditions (which are NOT included in the app pop up I received) state that this applies to only the first 10 km and does not include ride time charges or taxes or tolls.”

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the information pertains to ride and coverage of kilometer for HAPPY100 code. The automatic pop up at the time of using the software, clearly states that “Valid till 6th November on mini and prime rides for up to 10KM”. The CCC noted that the claim offer, “Ride anywhere in Mumbai for just Rs.100! This entire week use code HAPPY100 and pay just Rs.100 for all your rides between 11am & 5pm”, is subject to terms and conditions which are mentioned by the advertiser that i.e. maximum distance applicable under Rs.100 fare: 10 km, valid on mini and prime rides. In view of this claim being subject to terms and conditions as conveyed in the communication, the advertisement was not considered to be misleading. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Philips Electronics India Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Philips Appliances"

COMPLAINT:

"In today’s times of India It says life long free service. There are some conditions on the left of the lifelong service logo. Not one line can be read. The font in miniscule and in very light grey."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response post the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the advertisement was inadvertently published with non-comprehensible and non-legible font size. The CCC concluded that the disclaimers in the advertisement were not legible, and contravened Clause VII (ii) of the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"One 97 Communications Limited (PayTM)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Flat 50% CashBack”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The advertisement is claiming to get FLAT 50% cash back by using coupon FESTIVE, but actual cashback is not as per claim. They have written T&C in a very small font which is misguiding consumer and paytm is getting lakhs of clicks on the add and they are making money out of that clicks. https://paytm.com/movies/Delhi-NCR Please look into matter and ask them to write Maximum cashback in the same line, style, and font size as they write the offer headlines."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the cashback of flat 50% is applicable on booking of minimum 2 tickets and the maximum cashback amount would be restricted to Rs.150/ only. The CCC noted that while the advertisement states “Flat” 50% regardless of the total purchase amount , the cashback being offered is limited to Rs 150/- and concluded that the claim offer, “Flat 50% cashback” is misleading by ambiguity. The website advertisement contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Lifezen Healthcare Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Tuska Calcium Tablets"

COMPLAINT:

"1. “High absorption calcium with vitamin D3” 2. “Can be consumed anytime – anywhere”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“The advt, copy attached, shows a large visual of Miss India 2016 winner - Miss Beautiful Eyes, Roshmitha Harimurthy, looking sporty and fit. The advts main slogan is- Make sure your bones keep up with the pace of your life. The text goes on to explain how with hectic lifestyle people do not eat right. Daily diet does not provide proper nutrition. The bones need appropriate calcium intake to remain healthy and strong. And, only that form of calcium that gets absorbed by the bones helps. Our objections 1. Can the company prove with reports from independent agencies that Tuskca is a form of high-absorption calcium? Is this the only brand of calcium tablet that is high-absorption? If not, the advt is misleading by omission. 2. Can be consumed anytime - anywhere makes the product sound like candy rather than a calcium supplement! The advt does not specify the dose. Popping calcium pills indiscriminately can have adverse side-effects. In fact, according to new research, for women above age 60, the risks of taking calcium pills outweigh the benefits. Though calcium and vitamin D supplements may prevent bone fractures in elderly women, it also increases their chances of getting a heart attack or a stroke, the study warns. Action to be taken? We propose to withdraw this advt immediately.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “High absorption calcium with vitamin D3”, appears to indicate that the Calcium present in the product is some unique form with high absorption resulting in higher bioavailability. This claim was not substantiated with any scientific rationale or clinical evidence, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC did not consider the claim, “Can be consumed anytime – anywhere”, to be objectionable for product of this nature i.e. Calcium supplement. And advertisement not mentioning product dose was not considered to be in contravention of the ASCI code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Lifezen Healthcare Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT: "EyeSpa eyedrops"

COMPLAINT:

“Instant relief for dry and tired eyes”, “Get soothing relief from eye spa”, “Trusted formula recommended by eye specialists”, “20 years of medical expertise”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Can the product be used for indefinite period without consulting the doctor. 2. Which eye specialists have recommended this product. 3. The claims 1-4 need to be substantiated with data from independent reports. Action to be taken? We propose that this ad should be immediately withdrawn"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Trusted formula recommended by eye specialists”, and “20 years of medical expertise”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC considered the claims, “Instant relief for dry and tired eyes”, and “Get soothing relief from eye spa”, to be generic to the eye drops category for CMC based product and did not consider them to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Ferrero India Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Kinder Joy"

COMPLAINT:

“It is misleadingly shown in the Advertisement that the product contain High quality Milk, Raw Material without colouring and preservatives and special pack which keep it fresh, all this claims are falsely made without any test from laboratory. I Request that a this TVC should be removed and penalty should be imposed on the company.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertiser has supported the various claims in the TVC by providing relevant data. Claim - “High quality Milk” – The CCC noted that the Advertiser has supported this claim by giving details about their quality standards for milk used in their products. Claim – “Raw Material without colouring and preservatives” - Advertiser has submitted independent lab test report confirming the absence of any added artificial colours and preservatives in their product. Claim – “Special pack which keeps it fresh” – Advertiser has submitted Product Packaging material standards and its benefit in maintaining the product shelf life in the special packing. The CCC concluded that all the claims objected to were substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Vimal Oil & Foods Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Vimal Refined Sunflower Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Vimal healthy oils 2. Vimal sunflower oil is considered healthy mainly due to its polysaturated fat content. 3. Sunflower oil’s light flavour doesn’t overpower the taste of other ingredients 4. Presence of Omega 6 and Vitamin E acts as an antioxidant which in turn, helps the body cells in retaining water. 5. Choose from Vimal’s widest range of healthy cooking oil to get the best of health 6. NRT – Nutrition Retention Technology"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Product- Cooking oil Appeared- Times of India, 30 September 2016 Language- English Claims: Our objections: • The benefits mentioned in the claim 2, 3 and 4 are intrinsic to sunflower oil. Studies show that sunflower oil has Omega 6 and Vitamin E. If it is just the sunflower oil which is responsible for these health benefits why shouldn’t consumers use any sunflower oil? • Are the health benefits claimed unique to Vimal Sunflower Oil? If not, the advt is misleading by omission. • What is meant by NRT – Nutrition Retention Technology? Has it been certified by an independent body? The claim needs substantiation from independent data? • How does Vimal claim that it has “widest range? of “healthy cooking oil?? This needs to be substantiated with independent data. Claims 1 to 7 need to be substantiated with independent data. Action to be taken ? We propose that this ad should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Presence of Omega 6 and Vitamin E acts as an antioxidant which in turn, helps the body cells in retaining water”, “NRT – Nutrition Retention Technology”, were not substantiated with supporting data or clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. The CCC considered the claims, “Vimal healthy oils”, “Vimal sunflower oil is considered healthy mainly due to its polysaturated fat content”, “Sunflower oil’s light flavour doesn’t overpower the taste of other ingredients”, “Choose from Vimal’s widest range of healthy cooking oil to get the best of health”, as generic claims. The CCC did not consider that the advertisement projected these to be unique to the advertised product and hence were not considered to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Pankaj Industries"
PRODUCT:"Gulab Sungold Refined Sunflower Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"“1. 100% Pure Gulab Oils 2. The less absorption oil 3. Gulab Sungold Refined Sunflower Oil is healthy due to it’s light flavour and does not overpower the taste of other ingredients 4. Being a less absorption oil, it creates more room for more taste, more health and more joy of eating. 5. The presence of Omega 6 and Vitamin E acts as an antioxidant which helps the body cells in retaining water. 6. Gulab Sungold Sunflower Oil is rich in natural vitamins. 7. It reduces the level of bad cholesterol 8. Gulab Sungold is the choice of millions owing to both great taste and hygiene”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Product: Cooking oil Appeared: Times of India, 30 September 2016 Language: English Our objections: • The benefits mentioned in claim 3,4,5,6 and 7 are intrinsic of sunflower oil. Studies show that sunflower oil has Omega 6 and Vitamin E. If it is just the sunflower oil which is responsible for these health benefits why shouldn’t consumers use any sunflower oil? • Are the health benefits claimed unique to Gulab Sungold Sunflower Oil? If not, the advt is misleading by omission. • How does it claim to be less absorption oil? Has it been certified by an independent body? • The claim “Choice of millions owing to both great taste and hygiene? needs to be substantiated with independent data. • How does Gulab Oil claim “100% Pure?? This needs substantiation from an independent certifying body. • Claims 1 to 8 need to be substantiated with independent data. Action to be taken? We propose that this ad should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “100% Pure Gulab Oils”, “The less absorption oil”, “Gulab Sungold Refined Sunflower Oil is healthy due to it’s light flavour and does not overpower the taste of other ingredients”, “Being a less absorption oil, it creates more room for more taste, more health and more joy of eating”, “The presence of Omega 6 and Vitamin E acts as an antioxidant which helps the body cells in retaining water”, “Gulab Sungold Sunflower Oil is rich in natural vitamins”, and “It reduces the level of bad cholesterol”, were not substantiated with technical data or product test reports, and are misleading by exaggeration. The claim, “Gulab Sungold is the choice of millions owing to both great taste and hygiene”, was not proven with supporting evidence and is misleading.The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Lifebuoy Immunity Boosting Hand Sanitizer"

COMPLAINT:

"“World’s first immunity boosting hand sanitizer.” “Fight against germs up to 10 hours.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded with a request for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time the advertiser was explained the rationale for CCC recommendation. Subsequently, the advertiser responded with additional data for review of the CCC recommendation. Advertiser states that their data shows that the hand sanitizer with active ingredient provides hygiene benefits on the skin, of human volunteers by inhibiting the test organism growth 10 hrs after product application. Advertiser provided a copy of this study which was done to compare the efficacy of hand sanitizer formulations in reducing the microbial load of test organism on forearms of healthy subjects after the contact period of 10 hours. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertiser submitted many references to substantiate the efficacy of the active ingredient in the product and demonstrated that it boosts AMP production. The test supported the product efficacy for protection against test organism up to 10 hours. The CCC concluded that in the context of the advertisement specifically calling out “Immunity of hands”, the claims, “immunity boosting hand sanitizer”, and “Fight against germs up to 10 hours”, were substantiated. The complaint is Not Upheld on Review."

 

COMPANY: "Mankind Pharma Limited"
PRODUCT:"Gas-O-Fast"

COMPLAINT:

"Print/POS Advertisement – Misleading and Disparaging ENO We allege that Print/POS Advertisement of Gas-O-Fast is misleading and is disparaging our product ENO® Fruit Salt® (‘ENO’), for the following reasons: 1. The print/POS advertisement shows ‘Gas-O-Fast’ sachet and compares it with another antacid sachet which is a blurred image of our product ENO. We are enclosing a copy of our ENO Lemon flavor sachet for your perusal which will clarify beyond doubt that the product being compared with is ENO. 2. The print/POS advtt. shows two bowls – one bowl is full of white powder and has a sachet of ENO on top which is termed as ‘Regular antacid’ with the heading of ‘Artificial Flavour’ and the other bowl is full of Ajwain, which is spilt around the bowl as well, and has a Gas-O-Fast sachet which is termed as ‘Ayurvedic Product’. 3. With this unfair manner of depicting two products, the marketers of Gas-O-Fast are misleading the consumers into believing that ENO is only full of powder with Artificial flavor while Gas-O-Fast is an Ayurvedic product which is full of real Ajwain. The marketers are totally disregarding and deliberately hiding the important fact from the consumers that ENO is an Ayurvedic proprietary medicine for relief from acidity. It is important to note here that ENO is an Ayurvedic proprietary medicine with Svarajsiksara and Nimbukamlam as its active ingredients and comes in various flavours. These flavours, in no way, impact the efficacy of the product. 4. Moreover, the manner of depiction adopted by the marketer of Gas-O-Fast in their print/POS advtt. also misleads the consumers to believe that Gas-O-Fast has got only Ajwain as its ingredient while the fact is that it has got only 64 mg of Ajwain seeds in addition to other active ingredients which are in much more quantities as compared to Ajwain seeds. It is also pertinent to note here that Gas-O-Fast also has Permitted flavor viz. Ajwain, in its product which has been declared on its label as well. TVC – Misleading and disparaging ENO As regards the TVC of Gas-O-Fast, we allege that the TVC is also misleading and is disparaging our product ENO for the following reasons: 1. The TVC opens with the protagonist holding a pack of ENO, which is blurred, who declares it to be an ‘Antacid with artificial flavour’. The protagonist is then shown as throwing away the ENO pack in a very disrespectful manner just because it has artificial flavor and then moves on to show a pack of Gas-O-Fast and declares that this product is with ‘real Jeera’. Next shot shows Gas-O-Fast being put into a glass of water which is then consumed by the protagonist who burps immediately upon consuming the drink and goes on to make a statement ‘recommended by Dadis and Naani’s’. 2. It is very evident that the execution of the TVC is also on similar lines as the print/POS advtt. of Gas-O-Fast which is intended to mislead the consumers into believing that ENO is only an Artificial flavor product while Gas-O-Fast is with real Jeera. The TVC deliberately hides an important fact from the consumers that ENO is an Ayurvedic proprietary medicine for relief from acidity and just emphasizes on the fact that the product has artificial flavor. As clarified earlier, it is pertinent to mention here that ENO is an Ayurvedic proprietary medicine with Svarajsiksara and Nimbukamlam as its active ingredients and comes in various flavours. These flavours, in no way, impact the efficacy of the product. Just by emphasizing that their product has got real jeera/ajwain, the advertisers/marketers of ‘Gas-O-Fast’ are trying to make unfair comparison of their product with ENO Fruit Salt, which is the market leader in the category of Antacid powders, without in any ways establishing the basis of claiming such superiority. For claiming that a drug is superior over the other, it is very important for the advertiser of the drug to clearly indicate the parameters on which the drug has got the superiority. No mention of ‘Indications’ in the print/ POS Advtt. or TVC of Gas-O-Fast Another important aspect which we would like to highlight is that in both the print/POS advertisement as well as the TVC, the advertiser has failed to communicate the indications for which their product is meant. Please note that Gas-O-Fast is an Ayurvedic drug and the advertisement of a drug should clearly mention the indications for which it can be used by the patients. The Advertisements thus become misleading on account of suppressing material information. Misleading brand name of ‘Gas-O-Fast’ regarding ‘indications’ for the product We would also like to bring to your attention the fact that the manufacturer/marketer of the product ‘Gas-OFast’ has deliberately chosen a brand name which misleads the consumers into believing that the product can provide Fast relief in the symptoms of ‘gas’ whereas the drug is an Antacid which is supposed to offer relief in the symptoms of ‘Acidity’. The advertiser/manufacturer should be advised to provide suitable substantiation and data to prove that their product will work ‘fast’ in the symptoms of ‘gas’ as well."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded and also requested for a personal hearing. The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI, at which time the advertiser was explained the rationale for CCC recommendation. Subsequently, the advertiser responded with additional data for review of the CCC recommendation. Advertiser states that the depiction of a bowlful of Jeera/Ajwain, does not in any manner imply that the sole ingredient or main active ingredient of Gasofast is Jeera/Ajwain. It was only to highlight the presence of the natural substance, a bowlful was shown in the Ad and not as an exaggeration. Advertiser further argues that they have the liberty to identify and highlight an active ingredient as the USP for the product and mere depiction of a bowl of Jeera/Ajwain would not amount to misleading in any manner whatsoever. The CCC noted that in the print advertisement, Gas-O-Fast sachet with a bowl overflowing with Ajwain and claim of “Asli Ajwain ke saath” is being compared against Regular antacid shown as a heap of powder, with an emphasis on “Artificial flavor”. The CCC noted that while the comparison is being made of the “artificial flavor” aspect of regular antacid, Ajwain – an ingredient known for its medicinal properties as a carminative – was being shown in exaggerated quantity not commensurate with its percentage in the product. The CCC observed that the TVC, too, strongly emphasizes on the presence of “Active Jeera” – presenting it as the main active ingredient – and links it for it being a reason to being recommended by grannies. No data was submitted by the advertiser to substantiate that Ajwain / Jeera is present at “active level” to provide the benefit as claimed in the TVC – contributing more than other active ingredients. The CCC observed that as per product pack declaration, the 5 gm sachet of Gas-O-Fast contains 2.14 gm of Nimbukamlam, 2.57 gm of Svarjiksara and only 0.152 gm of Jeera. Contrary to the advertiser’s contention that Ajwain and Jeera are acting by their action in the mouth, the advertisement depicts the product being re-constituted in water and being gulped down, thus not demonstrating its action in the mouth. The CCC also disagreed with the advertiser’s contention of the claim being puffery to attract the attention of consumer, especially for a medicinal product which conveys the active component. The CCC referred to another judgement of the Delhi high Court in the matter of Colgate v/s HUL in 2013, that while hyped up advertising may be permissible, it cannot transgress the grey areas of permissible assertions, and if it does so, the advertiser must have some reasonable factual basis for the assertion made. It is not possible therefore for anybody to make an off the cuff or unsubstantiated claim. Thus while the CCC agreed that Jeera and Ajwain could be natural flavours in the product at the percentages they are used in the product, the CCC opined that exaggerated depiction of Ajwain / Jeera in the product communication is likely to mislead consumers into believing that Gas-O-Fast has got only Ajwain / Jeera as its ingredient / main active ingredient, whereas that is not the case. As conveyed by the complainant and as per pack declarations, the advertised product has only a small quantity of Ajwain / Jeera compared to other active ingredients. The CCC concluded that the print/POS and TVC was misleading by exaggeration and implication and contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The CCC recommendation that the complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY: "Greek Retail P. Limited Inocos Herbal Industries"
PRODUCT:"Radyance Skin Brightening Complex"

COMPLAINT:

"The ad show shows two photos of a boy, one fair one dark, it says this is how e got fair in 14 days. You click on it, it takes you I an article, which lists the process, benefits, unnamed doctors claim and even comments from users (fake?) http://fitmomdaily.comgwnxaezedgski.top/mob_m/mob_wh/index.html?city=Visakhapatnam&voluumdata Fair serum that can change you skin colour in 14 days Is highly misleading and can cause serious damage to the skin on the long run. This is adding fuel to the current skin colour bias prevalent in our society. I want these write ups banned."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"In order to get the advertiser details, the ASCI placed an order for the advertised product and received e:mail confirmation for the orders placed as well as delivery of the product. Based on the e:mail addresses, pack declarations and courier details, the ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser to the correspondence from ASCI prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Visakapatnam guys are using this method to get 5 shades fairer in 14 days”, is false, misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of experience and knowledge. The product efficacy claim of “getting 5 shades fairer in 14 days”, was not substantiated and the efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the usage of the product are grossly misleading. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Magicbricks.com ( Magic Bricks)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Your trust has made us India's No 1 property site”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

“This electronic hoarding is displayed at Western Express metro Mumbai. On what ground it is displaying that they are India's No 1 property site. Mere survey conducted by a partner private firm must not be the ground.”

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of five days to the standard lead time of seven days to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the website advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the claim is made on the basis of the ComScore’s report on Total Unique Visitors on Magicbricks website, from January 2015 till January 2016. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of the Comscore report for the period mentioned and also the updated reports till August 2016. The CCC noted that as per ComScore data presented by the advertiser, Magicbricks.com has been the leading property site in the category in terms of total unique visitors from Jan 2015 to Jan 2016. However, the CCC observed that the wording of the leadership claim in the advertisement is ambiguous. Also, as the unique visits to the portal in themselves do not substantiate the leadership claim as it does not quantify the total number of properties displayed or sold via this platform and the productivity score in comparison to other property portals and hence the leadership claim is subject to interpretation. The CCC noted that the disclaimer in the advertisement is not in compliance with the ASCI guidelines on disclaimer as it is not legible and is misleading by ambiguity as it uses the term “As per Comscore Total UV Jan 2015 to Jan 2016” as stated by the advertiser. The CCC was of the opinion that the disclaimer should not attempt to hide material information with respect to the claim, the omission/absence of which is likely to make the advertisement deceptive or conceal its commercial intent. Therefore, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Your trust has made us India's No. 1 property site”, is misleading by ambiguity and implication. The advertisement – hoarding contravened Chapter I.4 of the ASCI Code and Clauses 2 and VII.3 (iii) of the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "InterGlobe Aviation Limited "
PRODUCT:"IndiGo Airlines"

COMPLAINT:

"“In the advertisement it has been clearly mentioned that fare has been started from just Rs.858, for booking till 8th Nov 2016 for travel between 11th Jan 2017 and 11th Apr 2017. When I was booking my flight ticket for 18th Jan 2017 (Delhi to Kolkata) on dated 6th Nov,2016 no such offer practically exist in Indigo website. This offer is not valid to any route at all.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC noted that the Complainant provided a screen shot of the website showing the flight fares for Delhi-Kolkata for the period 15th January 2017 to 21st January 2017, from which it is clear that the advertised fare is not available for the given time period. The CCC viewed the facebook advertisement and the evidence provided by the complainant. In the absence of comments from the advertiser and any evidence that the advertised fare was indeed availed by any customer, the CCC concluded that the claim offer, “With fares starting at just Rs.858……… Book till 8th November 2016 for travel between 11th Jan 2017 and 11th Apr 2017”, is false as no such flight fare exists, and is misleading by ambiguity as there is no specific information about which route or for which flight this offer is available. The facebook advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Greek Retail P. Limited Inocos Herbal Industries"
PRODUCT:"Raydance Skin Brightening Serum"

COMPLAINT:

"1. The claim of 5 shades fairer in just 90 seconds is not substantiated. 2. There is no evidence to substantiate the claim that the product is safe."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Complaint 1: https://secure.radyance.com/mot/start?n1=CM&n2=2045&c1=471528430&v1=d7J77AHU1SJH867VGLBDVADO https://www.radyance.com/how-radyance-works Complaint 2: “False advertising of fairness product. False advertising of giving fairness in 90 seconds”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"In order to get the advertiser details, the ASCI placed an order for the advertised product and received e:mail confirmation for the orders placed as well as delivery of the product. Based on the e:mail addresses, pack declarations and courier details, the ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainants. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the website advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Look 5 shades fairer in just 90 seconds”, is false, not substantiated with product efficacy data, is misleading by gross exaggeration and exploits consumers’ lack of experience and knowledge. The website advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the Code. The complaints were UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"MakeMyTrip India Pvt Ltd (MakeMyTrip)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Pay at checkout”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Make my trip offer on-line hotel room booking. TV advertise comprising of Bollywood personalities like Alia Bhatt and Ranvir Singh. It is claimed that you can book a hotel room and pay at check out. The TV advertisement is misleading and gives false promise. Check through mobile app or from website www.makemytrip.com; at the end of booking it asks for the payment without which booking procedure couldn’t get completed. One must pay full, in advance whether you apply discount or not. “now you can book a hotel and pay later. (Normally who book a hotel room through Make My Trip web site or app; has to pay the hotel upfront for entire booking) Advertise suggests that now you can book a hotel room through Make My Trip and pay your entire stay at the time of check out.” I request you (or your team) to check booking randomly at any hotel room across India by using site www.makemytrip.com or their mobile app. You still have to pay upfront and there is no provision or option to select like ""pay later"" or ""pay at check out"". You do not get confirmed room booking unless full payment is done. If it is on select hotels (i have found none) it should be indicated through advertise or kind of disclaimer should be added. My objection is to the final message through the said advertise: The message given through advertise (as in the link) makes false promise. In reality any one can check if hotel room can be booked without payment through their site or app on cellphone.”"

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that their offer is available at a limited number of hotels. The TVC displays that “T&C apply”. The mobile app as well the company website also mention the detailed terms and conditions and FAQs pertaining to Pay at Check Out feature. The CCC referred to the FAQs and the terms and conditions of the offer. The CCC concluded that the claim offer, “Pay at check out. Zero Advance. Book a hotel now, pay only when you check out”, is not misleading as it is subject to terms and conditions which is mentioned in the disclaimer. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Torque Pharmaceuticals"
PRODUCT:"U B Fair"

COMPLAINT:

"The advertisements shows, one dull looking boy (black) is not able to achieve what he wants to but if he use this cream, he will became famous and successful. U-B Fair cream spreading wrong information. Most of people things if they are not fair, they are not able to achieve anything. Because of this mentality spread by fairness cream company, people are not willing to marry black looking girl or boy and black looking people face humiliation in our society. Is this 21st century where people judged by color than their talent. This is happening because of such kind of false ad."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response through their Advocates. Advocate states that the advertisement of the said product is Sub-Judice before the Hon'ble High. Court of Bombay and Stay has been granted by the Hon'ble Court in favour of the company and the said order is still operational. The CCC noted that the matter referred to by the advertiser is a dispute between them and the State FDA authorities unrelated to the objection raised by the complainant i.e. the advertisement shows that a dull looking boy (black) is not able to achive what he wants to but if he use this cream, he will become famous and successful. Therefore CCC recommended that the complaint should be looked into. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advocates response. The CCC observed that the TVC shows protagonist with a dark complexion and concerned look pre-use. The TVC emphasizes on improvement skin tone and the voice over states “… banja star…” “U B Fair, ab ladkon ki nikal padi”. This when seen in conjunction with the visuals of the protagonist with fairer skin tone, happy, smiling and surrounded by women was considered to be in contravention of Clause 1 and 2 of the ASCI Guidelines of Advertising for Skin Lightening or Fairness Improvement Products. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Jaipur Physiotherapy"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Gave Permanent Relief to more than 10,000 patients without any medicines successfully 2. In case of No Growth in Children (Cerebral Palsy) 3. Symptoms of Paralysis"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Gave Permanent Relief to more than 10,000 patients without any medicines successfully”, and for the indications mentioned in the advertisement implying cure, Cerebral Palsy and Paralysis , no supporting evidence was provided. Specific to the claims related to cure for Paralysis, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 39 under DMR schedule). Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Quantum Naturals "
PRODUCT:"Quanto Max"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Increases Vitality, Energy and Stamina. 2. Increases Sperm Count 3. Effective in erectile disorders 4. Increases stamina and performance"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Increases Vitality, Energy and Stamina.”, “Increases Sperm Count”, “Effective in erectile disorders”, “Increases stamina and performance”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data, and are misleading. Also, these claims when read in conjunction with advertisement visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 36. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Quantum Naturals "
PRODUCT:"Quanto Diab Forte"

COMPLAINT:

“Helps Maintain Healthy Blood Sugar Levels”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Helps Maintain Healthy Blood Sugar Levels”, was not substantiated clinically with product efficacy data, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Aarogyam Ayur Panch Hospital & Research Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Successful treatment of 25000 Patients through Ayurvedic Chikitsa. 2. Now more easy to reduce 5-55 kg weight 3. Reduce 5-10 kg weight in 15 days 4. Freedom from obesity 5. Will not regain the lost weight 6. It is not necessary to diet extra and exercise extra during the treatment"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Successful treatment of 25000 Patients through Ayurvedic Chikitsa”, was not proven with supporting evidence, and is misleading. Claims, “Now more easy to reduce 5-55 kg weight”, “Reduce 5-10 kg weight in 15 days”, “Freedom from obesity”, “Will not regain the lost weight” were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, specific to the claims implying cure for obesity, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 38 under DMR schedule). The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Lakme Youth Infinity Range of Products"

COMPLAINT:

"1. The new Lakme Youth Infinity range keeps the contoured look of youth. 2. Percentages of women who have experienced the sculpting power of Lakme Youth Infinity Day Crème* - Improved Elasticity - 97% - Firmer skin - 97% - Younger looking skin - 95% - Lighter skin tone - 97% 3. Super: *Based on a consumer study with Indian women in 2009"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided reports of various Clinical / consumer studies. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertisement emphasizes on the “sculpting” benefit of the product and “retaining 20s sculpted look and keeping the contoured look of youth” . Whereas the data submitted enlists results of the various evaluations done on the Lakme youth Infinity range, does not simulate any condition that could relate to age related changes in contour or shape of the face. On the basis of data provided; it is incorrect to state that the products maintains the contour and shape of the face as in the younger days and retains the “20’s sculpted look”. The claim of product keeping the contoured look is not substantiated. The CCC noted that the 2009 study being referred to in the advertisement for the claim support for “percentage of women who have experienced the sculpting power of Lakme Youth Infinity Day Crème” is a branded study and captures only consumer perception / Top 2 Box Imagery score. The study outcome does support the claim made in the advertisement of women having experienced the sculpting power of the product. The CCC concluded that the claims, “The new Lakme Youth Infinity range keeps the contoured look of youth”, “Percentages of women who have experienced the sculpting power of Lakme Youth Infinity Day Crème*” were not substantiated and are misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Swajal Water Pvt. Ltd (Swajal)"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“India’s most awarded brand”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that they have been awarded by Ministry of drinking water, Ministry of New and renewable sources and Department of Science and Technology and many of the awards are mentioned in their website. The CCC noted that the advertiser has only given assertions about their brand being the most awarded brand but has not provided any supporting evidence such as comparison with other brands in the market. In the absence of claim support, the CCC concluded that the claim, “India’s most awarded brand”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Advanced Beauty & Cosmetic Clinic"
PRODUCT:"Minus Cosmetic"

COMPLAINT:

"“Get Rid of Double-Chin, Love-Handles, Belly Fat, Back Fat, Inner and Cuter Thigh Fat” The Before and After Visuals are Misleading."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response post the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that they have high quality trained doctors providing services using modern equipments with clinically proven treatments. The CCC noted that the advertiser has only given assertions about their treatment but has not provided any evidence in support of their claims such as the type of treatment provided and results achieved through these treatments. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Get Rid of Double-Chin, Love-Handles, Belly Fat, Back Fat, Inner and Cuter Thigh Fat”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"SeaGreen Distributions LLP-"
PRODUCT: "Nano Fixit"

COMPLAINT:

"1. 92.7% Radiation Reduction 2. Stronger Than Any Other Tempered Glass. 3. The World’s No.1 and Only Liquid Screen Protector! 4. 3D Touch Experience 5. lasts upto 1 year"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted as follows - Claim – “92.7% Radiation Reduction” – Advertiser performed a test witnessed by M/S SGS Philippines, in which a client-supplied radio-field meter Cornet ED-65 was used to test coated and control un-coated Samsung phones. As per the test report, there was a 92.7% power reduction on the coated phone as compared to the un-coated phone. However, the scientific basis for this action was not explained by the advertiser. This claim was not adequately substantiated. Claim - “Stronger Than Any Other Tempered Glass” - The test used was a pencil scratch test, wherein a 6H pencil did not scratch the coated surface. But the test was incomplete insofar as not having a control: the underlying glass itself is of unknown (untested) hardness, so the additional protection, if any, provided by coating was not established. More importantly, the test itself does not test the strength of the glass: it merely tests the coating. The impression created by the ad is that it strengthens the underlying glass, which is not established. This claim was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. Claim – “The World’s No.1 and Only Liquid Screen Protector” - was not substantiated with market survey data, and with comparative data versus other key players in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. The claim is also misleading by exaggeration. Claim – “3D Touch Experience” - Advertiser’s response states that the product does not interfere with the 3D touch technology touted by certain phones like Apple. No such test was provided to substantiate this claim. The claim is misleading as it creates an impression that the coating provides a 3D touch feature (where it does not exist). Claim – “lasts upto 1 year”. Advertiser states that it gives enough of the liquid to re-apply if needed. No technical substantiation of this was provided. Also, the claim is misleading. Based on the above observations, the CCC concluded that the advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Kangra Herb Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“One can avoid kidney, liver and knee transplant and can get successfully treated with medicines made from organic herbs and has no side effects. Also claims to be world’s best herbal products manufacturing company and treatments are more successful than dashkarma”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this specific complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “One can avoid kidney, liver and knee transplant and can get successfully treated with medicines made from organic herbs and has no side effects”, were not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence. Claim, “world’s best herbal products manufacturing company”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar manufacturers in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Claim, “treatments are more successful than dashkarma”, was not substantiated with supporting data. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. Also, specific to the claims implying cure of liver disorders, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 33. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "SDI Herbo-Chem Pvt. Ltd."
PRODUCT:"Zosh Capsules/Oil"

COMPLAINT:

“Voice over says- “Keep your partner happy with Zosh Oil and Capsules”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objection raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the voiceover claim, “Keep your partner happy with Zosh Oil and Capsules”, was not substantiated with product efficacy data, and is misleading. Also, this claim when read in conjunction with the TVC visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 36. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Dr. Batra’s Homeopathy Family Clinic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“We have provided successful treatments for more than 10 lakh patients in 142 cities for hairfall, skin disorder, allergy, breathlessness, gastric disorder, women’s issues, high sugar levels, joint aches, obesity, sexual problems, thyroid and other health problems for people of all ages.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “We have provided successful treatments for more than 10 lakh patients in 142 cities for hairfall, skin disorder, allergy, breathlessness, gastric disorder, women’s issues, high sugar levels, joint aches, obesity, sexual problems, thyroid and other health problems for people of all ages”, were not substantiated with supporting evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, specific to the claim related to successful treatment of sexual problems, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 36. Specific to the claims related to successful treatment for Diabetes (high sugar levels) and obesity, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act ((item 9 and 38 under DMR schedule). The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Deepak Ayurveda "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Improve your health. 2. Get your money back if there is no benefit. 3. See the difference in 15 days.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Amar Ujala) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media as well as the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Improve your health”, and “See the difference in 15 days”, were not substantiated with supporting data. Claim, “Get your money back if there is no benefit”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of the customers who were refunded with the money back. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Sanat Products Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Uplat"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Boost Platelet Count, Naturally 2. Most Trusted Brand"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. Advertiser states that their product is dietary supplement and is not intended to cure any disease. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a copy of FSSAI Licence, product packaging, and journal reference on active ingredients Carica papaya and Tinospora cordifolia. The advertiser argues that they are the most trusted brand as per feedback received from consumers. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as the opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that the advertised product belongs to food category and directly correlates the platelet boosting efficacy to a disease like Dengue. As claim support data, the advertiser has submitted published literature for the two active ingredients in the products. However, there was no clinical evidence provided for the product with the specific combination of the active ingredients at the dosage recommended . The CCC concluded that the claim, “Boost Platelet Count, Naturally” was inadequately substantiated with product efficacy data, and is misleading. The claim, “most trusted brand”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other competitive products in the same category, and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Nandighosh Diary Products Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Kaushalya Gold Milk"

COMPLAINT:

"“The Manufacturer is describing everywhere GOLDMILK which is neither the constituent nor the ingredient of the milk. The manufacture is giving a false misleading claim through all its product packaging, advertising materials. It's also contradicting to packaging labelling regulations for FSSAI False, misleading claim of GOLDMILK through packaging”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the product packaging and concluded that the claim, “Gold Milk”, appears to be a coined word to position their product variant and is not in contravention of the ASCI code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Pragati Milk Products Pvt.Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Pragati Gold Milk"

COMPLAINT:

"The Manufacturer is describing everywhere GOLDMILK which is neither the constituent nor the ingredient of the milk. The manufacture is giving a false misleading claim through all its product packaging, advertising materials. It's also contradicting to packaging labelling regulations for FSSAI False, misleading claim of GOLDMILK through hoarding Pls find below link on the TVC on GoldMilk which is also another evidence of Misleading Communication of GOLDMILK https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtQHAvqJoOk Earlier I have given Photos of GOLDMILK in printing Media and Now attached also the DigitalMedia Campaign"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the Ad – hoarding and the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that they are using the name as “Pragati Gold Milk” for one of their premium product. The CCC noted that the advertiser is using a coined word “Gold Milk” to position their premium product and concluded that the claim, “Gold Milk”, is not in contravention of the ASCI code. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bajaj Auto Ltd "
PRODUCT:"Bajaj Pulsar"

COMPLAINT:

"“No 1 Sports bike for 15 years” A rider is shown to do a dangerous wheelie without any warning given in the ad"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our Objection: 1. The claim needs to be substantiated with data from independent reports. How does Pulsar claim to be No 1 Sports bike for 15 years. 2. The stunt shown in the print ad is dangerous and it does not have any cautionary message drawing viewer attention to the depiction of stunts According to us, the advertisement contravenes Guidelines on Advertisements for Automotive vehicles of ASCI code Action to be taken: We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"On receiving the CCC’s recommendation, the advertiser responded seeking a Review. As claim support data, the advertiser provided annual sales figures (Monthly Average) of all brands operating in the sports category in India for last 15 years. Advertiser states that the data submitted for review proves that Pulsar is No.1 sports bike in the country, not just each and every year, but also cumulatively and the data is verifiable from Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM). The Pulsar bike stunt is a creative hyperbole and an exaggeration. On reviewing the claim support data, the CCC noted that volume share of Bajaj Pulsar bikes is higher than all other sports bikes each year for last 15 years. In the absence of any contradictory data of other competitors, the CCC concluded that the claim, “No 1 Sports bike for 15 years”, was substantiated. This complaint is Not Upheld on Review. The CCC recommended that the advertiser should be advised to include the necessary disclaimer to indicate the source of market leadership data. As for the stunts depicted in the advertisement, the CCC concluded that in the absence of any disclaimer, it shows/encourages a dangerous practice, manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence. The advertisement contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code and Clause C of Guidelines on Advertisements for Automotive Vehicles. The CCC recommendation of complaint being Upheld stands on Review."

 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Lifebuoy Immunity Boosting Hand Sanitizer"

COMPLAINT:

"The ad shows school children being taught to use hand sanitiser before having their lunch. The ad claims protection from germs for 10 hours. (Graphics show an iron glove around the child's hands). Hand Sanitisers are AT BEST a stop gap solution till one can WASH their hands for maximum protection.( I am attaching some reference links): http://www.thehealthsite.com/diseases-conditions/hand-sanitizers-9-reasons-you-should-think-before-using-them/ http://www.newsmax.com/Health/Headline/illness-washing-hands-sanitizers/2014/12/23/id/614647/ The use of sanitizers by adults in suitable situations may still be valid, however teaching parents/children that it is a substitute for washing hands is Outright Dangerous For Children. Please Take Preventive Steps Immediately.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the TVC does not show that usage of hand sanitizer as better or an alternative to hand washing and that the advertised product is much more than the traditional hand sanitizer, as it is formulated to work on, and increase the level of innate immunity in the area of application, thereby enabling long term protection from germs. The Advertiser provided WHO and CDC recommendations on use of Hand Sanitizer as evidence to show that it’s use is not discouraged by them. The CCC noted that the TVC is not teaching children that use of hand sanitizer is a substitute for washing hands. In the context of this TVC, the complaint was NOT UPHELD. As for the complaint against the claim, “10 hour germ protection”, this subject was part of a similar complaint (C.1608-C.945) taken up earlier. The CCC noted that the advertiser submitted data to substantiate the efficacy of the active ingredient in the product and demonstrated that it boosts AMP production. The test supported the product efficacy, for protection against test organism, up to 10 hours. The CCC concluded that in the context of the advertisement specifically calling out “Immunity of hands” and showing a visual of an iron glove clad hand, the claims, “immunity boosting hand sanitizer”, and “Fight against germs up to 10 hours”, were substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Hindustan Unilever Ltd"
PRODUCT:"New Baby Dove Soap"

COMPLAINT:

"“This Complaint relates to advertisements of Hindustan Unilever Limited (""HUL"") concerning their 'New Baby Dove' product (""Baby Dove""), which are currently published only on the website Firstcry.com (""Firstcry"") to the best of our knowledge. Details of the said advertisements and remarks made therein are enclosed in a tabular form as 'Annexure A' (""Advertisement""), along with an electronic copy of the Advertisement. The Advertisement starts with visuals of ""first time mothers"" testing various objects that they use for their babies. It thereafter goes on to depict a supposed test of Baby Dove against three other soaps which are characterised as ""Ordinary Soaps"", two of which are pillow shaped and respectively pink and white in colour. The test is carried out by placing an unidentified paper shaped as a duck on the said soaps, and the visual thereafter shows that the duck shaped paper on Baby Dove remains intact, while that on the other three soaps disintegrates. This Advertisement is patently false and misleading, and disparaging of our products, 'Johnson Baby Soap' and 'Johnson's Baby Soap Blossoms' (""Our Products""), and is violative of your Code for Self Regulation in Advertising (""ASCI Code""), as well as your ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers made in supporting, limiting or explaining claims made in Advertisements (""Disclaimer Guidelines""). Use of Testing Paper: 1. The Advertisement deliberately does not indicate the nature or quality of the alleged Testing Paper, or any of its properties or the conditions under which it was used. An average consumer may be swayed by the seemingly scientific demonstration of the degeneration of Testing Paper. HUL, in the HUL Reply, has suggested that the Testing Paper is paper made out of the protein zein. It has further suggested that ""zein protein is a model for epidermal keratin found in skin."" It is submitted that the Advertisement itself does not make any such disclosure, and hence, in itself is an attempt to mislead consumers. Zein Paper and Human Skin: i. Zein protein is not an appropriate representation of or proxy for human skin. The Stratum Corneum, which is the outermost layer of human skin consists of 70% protein, 15% lipids and 15% water. The protein in human skin is known as keratin. Any zein coated test paper is likely to contains 96.7 protein and cannot hence be an accurate representation of the Stratum Corneum. The greater percentage of protein in zein paper could result in it showing an exaggerated amount of damage. ii. Zein protein is sourced from zein corn powder, which being vegetal in origin is different from keratin, which is of animal origin. This leads to substantial differences in the distribution of the amino acids present in both proteins. iii. A peculiar characteristic of keratin is the large quantity of residues of cysteine, a semi-essential proteinogenic amino acid contained in it. This quantity of cysteine increases the insolubility of keratin and its resistance to degradation. The cysteine content of keratin is substantially greater than that of zein, and therefore, the paper made of zein protein is much more fragile and less resistant than keratin, which is more resistant to degradation. iv. Hence, to the extent that the Advertisement assumes that keratin (skin) will have a behavior similar to that of zein (paper used in the test) when exposed to a bar soap, it is entirely misleading and inappropriate. Use of zein paper as a testing agent: v. Zein coated test paper is not standardised or readily available in the market, like pH paper. It is prepared in the laboratory, and its composition and the content of zein therein can vary. Without disclosure as to the nature or quality of paper, and the amount of zein protein therein, it is not possible to reliably replicate or reproduce the alleged results in the HUL advertisement. vi. There is in fact no such ordinarily available paper that can accurately represent or reconstruct the natural features of human skin. vii. The Advertisement does not disclose the conditions in which the alleged tests with zein paper are carried out. In particular, it does not disclose either the amount of water used or the duration of time in the use of the Testing Paper on Baby Dove or on the 'Ordinary Baby Soap'. In the circumstances, the results of such use are impossible to reliably replicate. Actual Use of Baby Soap: viii. In normal use of baby soap, the product is usually rubbed in the hands of the mother, diluted in water, applied to the baby's skin and then rinsed well to remove the soap from the baby's skin. ix. In the Advertisement, the Testing Paper is applied directly to the bar of soap, without any dilution by water, and left there for an indeterminate period without rinsing. Thus, the Testing Paper is subjected to a significantly higher concentration of soap, for a much longer period of time. x. The use of the Testing Paper, hence does not represent the actual use of baby soap, and cannot be used as a proxy for regular use. The Advertisement however appears to suggest to consumers that the alleged disintegration of the Testing Paper can be seen from regular use of baby soap, which is practically and scientifically incorrect. 4. The use of the testing paper in the Advertisement is hence not capable of substantiation, does not indicate the source of such data and distorts facts and misleads consumers. It is also not factual or accurate, and unfairly denigrates Our Products by implication. Misleading Disclaimers: 1. The comparison in the Advertisements shows three distinct soaps as 'Ordinary Baby Soap', and the alleged Testing Paper is applied on the said three 'Ordinary Baby Soaps' and Baby Dove. The disclaimers in the Advertisement are as follows: • 'time elapse demonstration shows how soap weakens proteins and strip skin's moisture *creative visualisation ' • 'Dryness is caused due to stripping of skin protein' 2. As indicated above, even if tests of the soaps in question are conducted by zein paper, there is no evidence to suggest that Our Product weakens proteins or strips skin's moisture. The Advertisement also deliberately does not disclose the conditions of use, such as the amount of water used or the duration of time in the use of the Testing Paper on Baby Dove or on the 'Ordinary Baby Soap', making the comparison completely unscientific and leading to a situation where the consumer is likely to be misled with regard to the properties of Baby Dove. 3. The disclaimer in the Advertisement hence hides material information with respect to the claim in the Advertisement (such as the nature of paper used, the duration of the test, etc), making the Advertisement deceptive. Further by suggesting that the visuals are only a ""creative visualisation"", the disclaimer attempts to correct misleading claims made in the Advertisement. Targeting of ""New Mums"": 1. The Advertisement exploits the fear of consumers, who are in general mothers, and are extremely sensitive about their babies. This situation is even more delicate when considering the ""first time mothers"", who, in light of the natural lack of expertise with the situation, may be more easily influenced with regard to information that is related to the health and welfare of their babies. 2. The unsubstantiated and unscientific claims in the Advertisement appear to specifically target ""First time mothers""/ ""new mums,"" with a view to exploiting their inadequate experience or knowledge. Reference to ""Ordinary Baby Soap"": 1. As stated above, Our Products are the only pillow shaped and/or pink baby soaps in the Indian market. The Advertisement depicts such pillow shaped and/or pink baby soaps which closely resemble Our Products as ""Ordinary Baby Soap."" This reference in itself is clearly made with the intention of disparaging Our Products and suggesting that Our Products are ""ordinary"" or in other words of inferior quality and that they are not as safe as Baby Dove for babies' skin. 2. The unfair comparisons made in the Advertisement are thus an attempt to deliberately denigrate Our Products. Visual Representations: 1. The Advertisement zooms into one of the baby soaps which strikingly resembles 'Johnson Baby Soap' and shows the deterioration of the alleged Testing Paper on our product as compared to Baby Dove. As no other baby soap in the Indian market is pink/white and pillow shaped besides that of ours, the visual impact of the Advertisement is hence patently disparaging of Our Products. 2. The visual result of the said Advertisements depicting dissolution/deterioration of alleged Testing Paper on the 'Ordinary Baby Soap' conveys to the general public/consumers that apart from Baby Dove which contains extra moisturising agents, other soaps such as Our Products, could dilacerate, dissolve or otherwise cause extensive damages to the skin of the baby. 3.The disintegration of the Testing Paper is a dramatic visual, which is aimed at causing fear to mothers, and in particular ""new mums"", with a view to discouraging them from using Our Products, by suggesting that such use would damage their babies' skins. 4. There is absolutely no scientific explanation or evidence which is offered for this claim and the comparison is not only based on unscientific and unsubstantiated methods but deliberately distorted to suggest that Our Products are unsafe for babies.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. Advertiser states that there is no uniqueness about the colours white and pink and contrary to the complainant’s objections, these are generic colours used in various soaps in the market, both in baby soap segment, and in the adult soap segment. The claim being made is with respect to the mildness properties of Baby Dove and that is indeed represented through the depicted test. As claim support data, the advertiser provided images of similar baby soaps with white/pink colours, and a copy of the test reports of Zein test conducted on various Indian baby soaps. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted that as per published literature there is good co-relation between zein test and in vivo skin irritation for surfactants and finished personal cleansing products and it is a standard method used in the industry. As per the Zein test reports, Dove baby soap has been shown to be milder as compared to all other soaps that were tested. Also, the CCC did not consider the colour and shape of the products depicted in the TVC to be uniquely identifiable with the complainant’s product/s. The also CCC noted that no data was submitted by the complainant to prove that their product was milder than the advertised product. The CCC did not consider the depiction of the mildness properties of the advertised product via “Zein Duck” demo and qualified with a disclaimer “creative visualization” to be objectionable. The CCC concluded that the comparisons made in the TVC of New baby Dove versus ordinary baby soap (via Zein duck demo) is not denigrating the complainant’s Products. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"J.G. Hosiery P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Amul Macho"

COMPLAINT:

“I raise an objection to an ad of MACHO BANIAN featuring Saif Ali Khan. This ad shows complete disregard to good traffic behaviour, shows and glorifies RASH, and DANGEROUS DRIVING. Shows people crashing due to competition of bad driving. As it is you see rash and careless driving on all roads. Such ads only promote bad behaviour in young minds. Plus it is immoral for any product to promote itself on bad conduct. I request this ad to be taken off and banned. This ad is shown repeatedly on various TV channels, all the time. This ad was again shown on Zee Marathi channel at 9.15 pm today that is 3rd Nov 2016.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that the communication objective is to convey the comfort of doing difficult things to appropriate ‘Bade Aaram Se’ positioning. The ad was shot in a controlled environment, using safety gears to ensure that there is no damage caused to any life (human or animal) or property. The CCC noted that the rider is shown performing stunts in normal streets, market and traffic conditions. This is contradictory to the disclaimer made in the TVC – “These acts/stunts have been performed under a controlled environment at a pre-selected location, by trained professional under expert supervision….” The CCC concluded that regardless of the disclaimer, the specific visuals showing the stunts performed by the rider in normal traffic and/or in presence of bystanders and public encourages dangerous practices, manifests a disregard for safety and encourages negligence. Also, the disclaimers in the TVC are not legible. The TVC contravened Chapter III.3 of the ASCI Code, and Clause VII (ii) of the ASCI Guidelines for Disclaimers. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Syntech Technology Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Gionee Marathon M5 Plus – PhoneoffSochOn Contest"

COMPLAINT:

"This is an old complaint. the gionee company ran a contest a while back during a major football tournament advertising to giveaway a gionee marathon m5. the advertisement said go and like the company page on facebook and follow them in twitter. After following a few instructions, they are in the virtual raffle for the giveaway. all above is fair. the problem was that there was too much fineprint in the rules and regulations of the contest.the rules said the contest is run from 27 to 30 of june. which is fine. they are rules. but what is not fine is airing the advertisements on tv and posting content asking people to like the page and follow them for a chance to get gionnee marathon m5 phone, even on the week after the contest is over. I have attached the proof of them posting content in facebook along with the rules and regulations file. My complaint is that by misleading the viewers, the gionee company have made millions of likes on their facebook profile and a similar number of followers in twitter.They did this by broadcasting the ad during the euro cup which has a huge following in india. I dont even know if they announced a winner for the competition. i became this late to complain here before i complained to another consumer complaint forum which turned out to be fake. http://consumerhelpline.gov.in/Complainant/MyComplaints.aspx now that i have found the real one, i am re complaining about the brand. please inquire and take necessary action. It was an advertisement aired a while back during the euro cup tournament in tv. i already sent you the Facebook postof them posting the ad even after the contest had ended. The gionee ad shown in tv during Euro cup matches was posted in Facebook for the first time after the contest already ended. and you can see the date in the pdf i attached also the fact that people have been responding to it long after the contest has ended. To see it for yourself, here is the link to the page i sent Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iZ-NjWF7V2U Contact me if you need further clarifications. Please don't reject this saying i didn't contact them first. if i had, they would have deleted the Facebook posts and cleared the evidence. i was waiting for the other customer complaint forum to respond when recently i found it shut down. that is why i complained here."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the TVC and the facebook advertisement and considered the advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the Contest was extended upto July 15, 2016 and information relating to the said extension was publicly announced on Twitter, and incidental changes were made to the rules and regulations governing the Contest. As supporting evidence, the advertiser provided screenshots of the web link with changes, and announcement of seven winners of the Contest on July 17, 2016. Based on this data, the CCC concluded that the claim - contest, “Gionee Marathon M5 Plus – PhoneoffSochOn Contest” is not misleading as the advertiser has stated all material conditions as to enable the consumer to obtain a true and fair view of their prospects in such activities. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Volkswagen Group Sales India P. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Volkswagen Ameo"

COMPLAINT:

“Tell dad, slowing down was never an option”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"The ad displays a car and father son duo nearby. The punch line says that tell dad, slowing down was never an option. Than it promotes 7 speed gear box and sport mode of the car. There are few images related to the feature of the vehicle and then there are few lines further detailing about the powerful engine and power it offers, and how you can use it to stay ahead / cruise ahead of others. The sport mode can be activated when you want to feel the rush or wish to stay ahead of others. This ad promotes fast driving among youth. Dad must have asked him to slow down sometime and now the son wants to revert back that slowing down was never an option. It also promotes that with power, auto gear and sport mode you can cruise ahead, faster than others. You can feel the rush while you drive this. This car is meant for daily commute in city / regular traffic condition and not meant for racing or race tracks. In India in 2014 more than 40% people (> 48,000 person, Report image attached) were killed because of over speeding of vehicles. User attracted to this ad will surely inclined to drive faster and will cause trouble to themselves and others. This ad promotes speeding and should be banned."

Recommendation: NOT UPHELD

"The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the Ad headline stating "Tell dad, Slowing down was never an option" is in the context of fast moving life in today's era and to stay ahead in the fast changing environment and tht their advertisement also carries an advisory “obey traffic rules”. The CCC concluded that the advertisement is not promoting dangerous driving and is not in contravention of the ASCI Guidelines on Advertisements for Automotive Vehicles. The complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Marico Ltd"
PRODUCT: "Parachute Advansed Coconut Hair Oil"

COMPLAINT:

“World’s Best Hair”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“World's Best Hair. As per tagline, Parachute advance gives you world's best Hair. I just want to know. How they are saying ""Product Gives you World's Best Hair"" as per the advertisement.”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and responded with a request for informal resolution of the complaint and two weeks lead time for the same. As the advertiser was not able to meet the timelines specified for Informal Resolution option, the complaint was processed for CCC deliberations. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the advertiser response stating that no comparison is being drawn in the TVC with any competitor product. The advertiser did not submit any claim support data and the CCC concluded that the voice over claim, “Parachute Advansed apnaiye aur paiye World’s Best Hair”, is an absolute claim which is not substantiated. Also, the claim is misleading by gross exaggeration and a misrepresentation regarding the product benefit. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Pathfinder Institute of Agriculture"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“100% Job Placement”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (Eenadu) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The CCC noted that no response was received from the advertiser or from the concerned media prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the print advertisement. In the absence of response from the concerned media and comments from the advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “100% Job Placement”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students, nor any independent audit or verification certificate. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions and Programs as well as Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"American Homeo Lab"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Doctors give best treatment for diabetes, sex problem, low semen without any side effects. 2. 100% Guarantee. 3. Effect starts from first day and cure in 1 month. The advertisement appears to be in violation of the Drugs & Magic Remedies Acts and Rules Act, 1955"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Doctors give best treatment for diabetes, sex problem, low semen without any side effects”, “Effect starts from first day and cure in 1 month”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. The claim, “100% Guarantee”, was not proven with supporting evidence of the customers who have been benefitted by the treatment. Specific to the claims related to treatment of sexual problems, low semen, read in conjunction with the advertisement visual, imply enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 36. Specific to the claims related to treatment for Diabetes, the Ad is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 9 under DMR schedule). The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Sri Ganapati Ayurveda"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Men and Horse never grow old 2. Take medicine for 15 days & see effects 3.Sexual weakness, lack of excitement, low sperm, Get full pleasure in old age Claims in the advertisement & the Visual in the Advertisement is in Violation of The Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1955."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the concerned Media (The Hind Samachar Ltd) for their assistance in providing the contact details of the advertiser, or to forward the complaint to the advertiser. The Media (Punjab Kesari Group) responded and provided the postal address of the advertiser and also informed that the advertiser has withdrawn the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Take medicine for 15 days & see effects”, “Sexual weakness, lack of excitement, low sperm, Get full pleasure in old age”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Specific to the claims implying treatment for sexual problems (Men and Horse never grow old, lack of excitement, low sperm, Get full pleasure in old age) read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Cosmetics Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 36. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Ruturaj Ayurvedic Gruh Udyog"
PRODUCT:"Ruturaj Herbal Shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

"“Ruturaj Herbal Shampoo- Completely Free From Parafin And Chemicals” “Hairfall Will Reduce In 3 Days.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response post the due date. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser argues that they have claimed the truth that their product is completely free from Paraffin and chemicals. The advertiser asserts that regular application of the product does reduce the hair fall and they missed adding a disclaimer that the effect claimed is due to the ingredients in the product. As claims support data, the advertiser provided an image of pack label and product ingredient details. However, the CCC noted that the Advertiser did not provide any data for the quantitative composition details of the “Shampoo base” referred in the product label which in CCC opinion would be most likely a chemical surfactant. In absence of this data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Ruturaj Herbal Shampoo - Completely Free From Chemicals”, is a tall claim which was not substantiated. The claim, “Hairfall Will Reduce In 3 Days”, was not substantiated with evidence for the efficacy of the advertised product. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Lifespan Clinic India"
PRODUCT:"Lifespan Diabetes Clinics"

COMPLAINT:

"“Introducing Zerona- world’s best waist reduction treatment” “Approved by Food and Drug Administration (USA)”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that Zerona is body-contouring laser treatment and it is the first and only device with 510k market clearance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the circumference reduction of the waist, hips, thighs, and the first non-invasive device of any kind given a 510k market clearance from the FDA for fat reduction. As claim support data, the advertiser provided literature references Low-Level Laser Therapy as a Non-Invasive Approach for Body Contouring and information pertaining “Photonica”. The CCC reviewed the data and concluded that the claims, “Zerona - world’s best waist reduction treatment”, was not substantiated with authentic supporting data to prove that it is indeed World’s best treatment for waist reduction. The data submitted as evidence for the claim, “Approved by Food and Drug Administration (USA)”, did not correspond to the advertised product “Zerona”. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Bansal Hospital "
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Bansal hospital's bariatrics unit give your freedom from obesity”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the advertisement was intended to make public aware regarding the ill effects of obesity and offer a free Consultation on the said date for those who desire. The CCC noted that the advertisement indicates that with consultation with the Bariatric Unit at Bansal Hospital, it is possible to get freedom from obesity, however the Advertiser has not provided any evidence of achieving such results. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Bansal hospital's bariatrics unit can give your freedom from obesity”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence and is misleading by implication. Also, specific to the claims implying cure for obesity, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 38 under DMR schedule). The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"The Slimming Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Reduce weight upto 6 kg in one month”, “No crash diet”, “No medicine”, “No gym”, “100% Result”, “No side effect”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that they use Electrotherapy as part of the “Slimming machine” sessions which is a safe and simple, non-surgical procedure which helps to reduce cellulite and assists in achieving visible improvement in body contour and skin tone. While the advertiser asserts on the benefits of this therapy, no scientific data was submitted to substantiate this treatment modality. Advertiser’s response stated the results for weight reduction of six of their clients and as claim support, the advertiser provided daily diary of their clients for weight loss as evidence. The CCC observed that this data was based on a very small number of unrepresentative population and for an unproven weight reduction therapy. As this weight loss data was not on based on rigorous trial on statistically significant number of patients and carried out in controlled environment to establish the benefits of the therapy being provided, the CCC did consider this data to be authentic and acceptable. The CCC concluded that the claims offering a specific weight loss in a specific period with assurance of “100% result” , “Reduce weight upto 6 kg in one month”, “No crash diet”, “No medicine”, “No gym”, “No side effect”, were inadequately substantiated. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD. "

 

COMPANY: "Medipulse Hospital"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Now you can also get rid of obesity & related problems 1. High Cholesterol 2. Diabetes 3. Blood Pressure Before and after visuals in the advertisement are misleading."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided research documents/articles on Bariatric surgery, profile of their hospital and details of the consumer testimonial. The CCC observed that as per the literature provided, the bariatric surgery could help in improving the conditions in obesity related diseases; However, the advertisement states that the patient could get rid of the obesity related problems. Also the advertiser states that they have a business alliance with the individual shown in the advertisement for the before and after visual and he has undergone the bariatric surgery at their hospital. However, no evidence was submitted by the advertiser for the same. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Now you can also get rid of obesity & related problems, High Cholesterol, Diabetes, Blood Pressure”, were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure for obesity, Diabetes, blood pressure, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (items 38, 9 and 27 under DMR schedule). Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are grossly misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Shretej Slimming Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Loose fat quick & easy. 2. Loose 4-6 Kg within 15 days 3. Loose 8-10 kg within 1 month 4. No Gym, No medicine 5. No Side effect 6. No crash diet 7. 100% Result & Guarantee"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertiser has only given assertions about their treatment via Heat and vibration machine but has not provided any scientific or clinical evidence to prove this treatment modality. The CCC observed that the claims are not on based on rigorous trial on statistically significant number of patients and carried out in controlled environment to establish the benefits of the therapy being provided. In the absence of any claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims offering a specific weight loss in a specific period with a guarantee, “Loose fat quick & easy”, “Loose 4-6 Kg within 15 days”, “Loose 8-10 kg within 1 month”, “No Gym, No medicine”, “No Side effect”, “No crash diet”, “100% Result & Guarantee”, were not substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Kolors Health Care India Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"1. Lose (Tummy, Sides, Thighs, Hips..) - Upto 6* Inches swiftly from any area of your body at KOLORS 2. Without Exercise & Gym, No Side-effects. 3. 100% Money back Guarantee Before and after visuals in the advertisement are misleading"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertiser has only given assertions about their treatment via Physiotherapy based massages but has not provided any scientific or clinical evidence to prove this treatment modality in support of their claims. The CCC observed that the claims are not on based on rigorous trial on statistically significant number of patients and carried out in controlled environment to establish the benefits of the therapy being provided. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims offering a specific inch loss in any specific area of the body or specific weight loss in a specific period as conveyed in the visual,, “Lose (Tummy, Sides, Thighs, Hips..) - Upto 6* Inches swiftly from any area of your body at KOLORS”, and “Without Exercise & Gym, No Side-effects”, were not substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggeration. The claim, “100% Money back Guarantee”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence of the customers who were refunded with the money back, and is misleading. Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Kangra Herb Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Be world’s best herbal product manufacturer. Also claims to give successful treatment for incurable diseases like skin psoriasis, liver cirrhosis, muscular dystrophy, parkinson, has no side effects and uses organic herbs that is more effective than dashkarma”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. The CCC noted that the advertiser only makes assertions regarding their claims but the Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claims made or details of the products and their efficacy. The CCC concluded that the claim, “successful treatment for incurable diseases like skin psoriasis, liver cirrhosis, muscular dystrophy, parkinson”, was not substantiated with any clinical evidence. Claim, “has no side effects and uses organic herbs that is more effective than dashkarma”, were not substantiated with supporting data regarding safety of the product. Claim, “world’s best herbal product manufacturer”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar manufacturers in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claims are misleading by gross exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure for liver cirrhosis (a liver disorder) and Parkinson, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 33 and 41 respectively. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"S10 Health Sports Medicine Centre"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

"Finally, Permanent solution for Bone and Joint Pain, Manage without surgery."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that their treatment regimen is scientific and evidence based after a proper consultation by the sports and exercise medicine consultant. Advertiser did not provide any supporting data for the claims made. The CCC observed that no rigorous trials have been conducted in statistically significant number of patients to prove the advertised claim. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the Claims, “Finally, Permanent solution for Bone and Joint Pain, Manage without surgery.” were not substantiated with clinical evidence. The claims are also misleading by gross exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Dr. Dassan’s Ayurvedic Herbal"
PRODUCT:"Re Renal"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Avoid Kidney disease and dialysis. 2. Patients experience that they are taking benefit of No. 1 Kidney care product. 3. For the first time, data and video of the patients being treated with best results is available on www.drdassans.com"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the Ingredients which has been used in Rerenal Capsules is purely according to Shastras which prevents kidney disease and can even avoid dialysis. Advertiser provided some of the reports of their patients showing results of before and after the treatment. The CCC noted that the advertiser asserts product benefits however, did not provide any evidence of product efficacy. The CCC observed that no rigorous trials have been conducted in statistically significant number of patients to prove the advertised claim. Advertiser did not submit the product sample and Product Approval License from Regulatory Authority. The CCC concluded that the claims, “Avoid Kidney disease and dialysis”, “Patients ko dilaya No.1 kidney care product ka ehsaas”, “For the first time, data and video of the patients being treated with best results is available on www.drdassans.com”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. The CCC observed that the testimonials are based on a very small number of unrepresentative population, without any actual clinical evaluation reports and for an unproven product treatment. Specific to the claims implying cure for kidney diseases, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act (item 22 under DMR schedule). The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Proyurveda Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Max NRG Range Of Products"

COMPLAINT:

“Helps in: Boosting energy”, “Improving immunity” “USA Patented”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. As claims support data, the advertiser provided references from Ayurveda textbooks, Research article on Glycyrrhizic Acid promotes M1 Macrophage Polarization in Murine Bone Marrow, List of ingredients, and US Patent details. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted as follows – Claim, “Boosting Energy”: MAX NRG Capsules and Syrup contains 14herbal ingredients, is a nutritional supplement. MAX NRG Capsules and Syrup contains Ashwagandha (Withania Somnifera) and Shatavari (Asparagus Racemosus) which are according to Ayurveda textbooks like Bhavaprakasha Nighantu are Balya & Rasayana (Annex. 1). Claims are based on properties of the ingredients of the product as accredited by Ayurvedic texts. The CCC concluded that in view of the several ingredients like Musali, Ashwagandha and Shatavari being well known to be used as Rasayana, for providing energy in Ayurveda, the claim, “Helps in boosting energy”, was acceptable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. Claim, “Improving Immunity” - Advertiser provided scientific evidence published in Medizators of Inflammation indicates that Glycyrrhizic acid promoted polarization of M 1 macrophages and enhanced its phagocytosis and bactericidal capacity (Annex. 2). A reference of data on Glycerrizic acid, an active component of Yashtimadhu was given. Any data or justification to substantiate the claim of immunity was not provided. The CCC concluded that the claim, “Improving immunity”, was inadequately substantiated and the claim is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim, “USA Patented” - The concept of Proyurveda derived from combination of Probiotic and Ayurveda is patented in USA no. 6080401 ( Annex.3). The CCC noted that while the advertisement positions the product as “Proyurveda – Enriched Bio Active Natural ingredients” the product is a patent and proprietory ayurvedic medicine and not as combination of probiotic and ayurveda. The reference to the US patent is ambiguous; the product per say has several ingredients and link of the product to deliver the patented claim and role of probiotic as with this product is not clearly established or substantiated. The CCC concluded that the claim, “USA Patented”, was inadequately substantiated, and is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. This complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Jeewan Jyoti Pharmacy Pvt.Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Healthsun Ayurvedic Capsules"

COMPLAINT:

“If you are thin then don't be sad, Health sun capsules and powder helps to eliminate your thinness and strengthens the digestion system, it improves blood circulation and helps to make body in shape & beautiful, Helps to gain weight by eliminating body and mental disorders and increases our confidence”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “If you are thin then don't be sad, Health sun capsules and powder helps to eliminate your thinness and strengthens the digestion system, it improves blood circulation and helps to make body in shape & beautiful, Helps to gain weight by eliminating body and mental disorders and increases our confidence”, were not substantiated with proof of product efficacy data, and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Emerald Jewel Industry India Limited"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Asia’s largest jewellery manufacturer”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that Emerald has incomparable expertise in age old traditional and state of art technology and provided details of the scale of their operations. As this data was not adequate to make a comparative claim of leadership in terms of size, the advertiser was further requested to provide figures in comparison to other jewellery manufacturers. In response to ASCI query, the advertiser further states that Jewellery manufacturing segment in India and Asian region is typically unorganized and competitive figures are not available for any reference. The advertiser states that if any other Jewellery manufacturers claim their production quantity to be more, they would revisit their stand. The CCC was of the view that the onus is on the advertiser to prove the claims made in their advertisement. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Asia’s largest jewellery manufacturer”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar jewellery manufacturers in the same category or any third party validation or research and is misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Global Consumer Products Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"DND Aeromax Coil Diffuser"

COMPLAINT:

“98 percent natural”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. On Advertiser’s request, the advertiser representatives were given personal hearing by ASCI. During the discussion, the Advertiser informed that 98% of the product is made of natural ingredients which helps in structuring of the product and burning material of the coil. Product has active ingredient TFT at 0.03% level which is responsible for mosquito repellent action. Advertiser further states that only 1.632% of the Product consists of chemical/artificial ingredients, while the remaining 98.368% of the Product consists of guar gum, starch, coconut shell powder and saw dust, all of which are naturally occurring substances. The CCC noted that the mosquito repellent coil structure is made of natural material however the insecticide which is responsible for the effect against mosquitoes is not natural. The CCC concluded that the claim, “98 percent natural”, is misleading by ambiguity, implication and omission of mention that active ingredient is chemical ingredient and the advertisement exploits the lack of consumers’ knowledge. The TVC contravened Chapters I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Aswini Homeo & Ayurvedic Products Pvt Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Aswini Hair Oil"

COMPLAINT:

“Freedom from hair fall”, “the only product that works on hair fall”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the TVC and considered the Advertiser’s response. Advertiser states that the model in the TVC tries to communicate that “for relief from hair fall make Aswini yours" and the word “Mukti” should be read as “relief”. The claim that the only product that works on hairfall is the opinion of the lady (actual customer who has used Aswini Hair Oil) in the TV commercial. The CCC noted that the advertiser did not submit any claim support data for their claims and the testimonial which was not backed by rigorous trials among statistically significant sample size of volunteers and controlled conditions was not considered to be acceptable. The claim also implied that other products do not work or provide similar benefits. The individual testimonial is not representative of general population. In the absence of claim support data, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Mukti from hair fall”, and “the only product that works on hair fall”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration and implication. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Velvette International Pharma Products – Memory Plus Tonic"
PRODUCT:

COMPLAINT:

“Claims that children who consume memory plus tonic tend to get more marks/ better grades. Also claims to be clinically proven.”

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

 

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the TVC. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claim, “children who consume memory plus tonic tend to get more marks/ better grades”, and “clinically proven”, were not substantiated with any study reports or with clinical evidence of product efficacy. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. The TVC contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Richfeel Health & Beauty Pvt.Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Richfeel Trichology Centre Hair and Scalp Clinic-Hair Thinning Treatment-anagrow"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Grow your own hair for just Re.1. 2. Richfeel natural hair transplant 3. Fight 5 signs of hair thinning for just Re 1. 4. Worlds first hair thinning treatment with plant stem cells 5. Anagrow is a treatment for hair volume and density. It does not grow new hair.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our Objections 1. In the first claim it says grow your own hair. The next claim says natural hair transplant. If it is hair transplant, how can it claim to grow hair. This needs explanations as the claims are contradictory. 2. What are the 5 signs of hair thinning that they claim to fight. 3. The ad says Anagrow is a treatment for hair volume and density. It does not grow new hair. Then how does it increase volume and density. 4. The claim 1-5 need to be substantiated with data from independent reports. Action to be taken- We propose that the advertisement should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The advertiser was granted an extension of six days to the standard lead time to submit their reply in response to their request for extension. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided reference articles by Mibelle biochemistry Switerzerland. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted as follows: The observed that the advertisement has a Claim prominently displayed in the headline as “Grow your own hair for just Re.1”, with a visual of 1 rupee coin; However, the claim was qualified in the body copy of the advertisement as, “only Rs. 60,000/-”. The CCC concluded that the claim offering the service at Rs 1/- is misleading by ambiguity. Claim, “Richfeel natural hair transplant” “Grow your own hair” - The CCC noted that the Hair transplant procedure involves cutting out hair from root and embedding it elsewhere. In that sense, growing your own hair claim was acceptable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. While it is true that a follicular unit extraction/transplant procedure involves no stitches, miniscule cuts are needed and there is always a possibility of very tiny scars. The CCC observed that the advertisement has claim of no cuts and no scars which could be misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “Fight 5 signs of hair thinning for just Re 1” – The CCC reviewed the five signs referred to by the advertiser and concluded that it is misleading to say that five signs of hair thinning are scanty hair, decreased volume, lack of hair growth, decreased density and hair loss. Scanty hair and decreased density mean the same thing and Hair thinning is synonymous with decreased volume. Also, lack of hair growth or shortening of length of hair will not contribute to hair thinning. Hair density is defined by number of hair growing per unit area. If new hair is not grown it cannot be claimed that hair density will improve. Claim, “Worlds first hair thinning treatment with plant stem cells’, was not substantiated with supporting evidence and with comparative data versus other hair thinning treatments available worldwide, and is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “Anagrow is a treatment for hair volume and density. It does not grow new hair” – The CCC observed that for Swiss apple stem cells: the effects as per Mibelle are all shown IN VITRO (in lab) conditions. The only hair related claim is “delays senescence of hair follicles” and there is no reference in PUBMED which lists peer reviewed journals. For Argan stem cells: The Annexure II claims stimulation of dermal progenitor but all claims on as per Mibelle are related to skin rejuvenation and not hair growth. No Reference In Pubmed which lists peer reviewed journals. Pea sprout stem cells: As per Mibelle, study was in human subjects, but only 10 human subjects for positive expression on hair gene expression in dermal papilla and in 20 subjects to study reduction of hair loss. Improved hair quality was patient’s subjective perception. Annexure II does not substantiate the claim made in table of contents of anagrow that pea sprout stem cells increase rate of growth of hair, neither does Mibelle website. There is no reference in PUBMED Which Lists Peer Reviewed Journals. Nano lipobelle coenzyme Q10: The Swiss company Mibelle group has only shown increase of hair follicle growth and stimulation of papilla cell proliferation IN VITRO (in a lab) means this has not been substantiated in living animals or humans. For this as well, there is no reference in PUBMED Which Lists Peer Reviewed Journals. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Anagrow is a treatment for hair volume and density. It does not grow new hair”, was inadequately substantiated, and is misleading by ambiguity. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 

COMPANY:"Nova Pulse IVF Clinic Private Limited"
PRODUCT:"Nova IVI Fertility"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Now treatment at India’s No 1 fertility chain is easier than ever before, thanks to easy EMIs 2. 6 reasons why NOVA IVI Fertility is the best choice 3. Easy EMI options for select credit card holders 4. India’s leading chain of fertility centres. Over 10,000 IVF pregnancies 5. Partnership with the world leader in reproductive medicine: IVI Spain 6. Acclaimed team of doctors, embryologists and counselors at every centre 7. Worldclass laboratory and facilities 8. Transparent pricing and continuous support"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"Our Objection- 1. How does NOVA IVI claim that it is the best choice 2. What is the data based on which they claim to be India’s No 1 fertility chain. 3. What is the data to support the claim that IVI Spain is world leader in reproductive medicine. 4. Who are the acclaimed team of doctors, embryologists and counselors. 5. Are the 10,000 plus IVF pregnancies done by NOVA IVI India If not, then the claim is misleading by omission. 6. All the claims need to be substantiated with data from independent reports. According to us, the advertisement contravenes Chapter 1.1 and 1.4 of ASCI code. Action to be taken ? We propose that this ad should be immediately withdrawn."

Recommendation: UPHELD

""The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of the various awards received and copies of certificates of excellence, IVI Clinical results, SGS Report, IVI awards, and manpower summary. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted as follows: Claim, “Now treatment at India’s No 1 fertility chain is easier than ever before, thanks to easy EMIs” – Advertiser states that in July 2016, they were awarded ""India's No. 1 Fertility Chain"" at the CIMS Healthcare Excellence Awards. Advertiser provided a copy of this award. The CCC concluded that this claim was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC recommended that the advertiser should add the source and date of research and criteria for assessment for the claim made in the advertisement via disclaimers. Claim, “India’s leading chain of fertility centres” – Advertiser states that in June 2016, they were awarded ""Leading Fertility Chain in India"" at the National Awards for Excellence in Healthcare. This recognition is further endorsed by the World CSR Day, Stars of the Industry Group, CMO Asia and World Sustainability Day. Advertiser provided a copy of this award. The CCC concluded that this claim was substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. Claim, “Over 10,000 IVF pregnancies” - Advertiser states that this is backed by internal data which is recorded and monitored via stringent reporting protocols internally. As claim support, Advertiser provided year wise breakup of the pregnancy numbers which is based on internal records of their company. However, in view of the CCC, it was only assertion by the advertiser and this claim was not substantiated with any other authentic evidence, independent audit or verification certificate, and is misleading. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD. Claim, “Partnership with the world leader in reproductive medicine: IVI Spain” – Advertiser states that in 2012, they joined hands with IVI, Spain. It is in this context that Nova IVI Fertility has brought in proven medical protocols, world-class practitioners and transparency in treatments to deliver the best possible results to couples with infertility issues. As claim support, Advertiser provided details of the IVI Foundation. The CCC did not consider the claim to be objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD. The CCC considered the claims, “6 reasons why NOVA IVI Fertility is the best choice”, “Easy EMI options for select credit card holders”, “Acclaimed team of doctors, embryologists and counselors at every centre”, “Worldclass laboratory and facilities”, “Transparent pricing and continuous support”, as generic claims which were not objectionable. This complaint was NOT UPHELD." "

 

COMPANY: "Emami Limited"
PRODUCT:"Keshking ayurvedic oil and shampoo"

COMPLAINT:

"1. Ultimate solution for hair fall 2. 5 Hair problems – 1 Ayurvedic solution 3. With 21 Ayurvedic herbs 4. Scalp and hair medicine 5. Recommended by world’s best hair experts. ( Names and pictures of a person from Australia and a doctor each from Japan and India are shown) 6. Testimonial from celebrity tennis player Sania Mirza claims “my hairfall problem is now solved. I win against hairfall* every time” – disclaimer says * hairfall due to hair breakage."

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

"“Our objections: 1. Claim 1 to 4 need to be substantiated by independent studies and research data. 2. What is meant by ‘ultimate solution’? Explain. It implies that after using these products, there will be no problems with hair. Grossly misleading. Also needs to be substantiated and certified by competent independent authority. 4. Claim 6: Exaggerated claims are made in testimonial from celebrity player Sania Mirza. It is misleading and creates undue influence on buyers. Putting a disclaimer in small letters negating the claim does not make it acceptable. Action to be taken? We propose this ad should be immediately withdrawn”"

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek a personal hearing and submitted their written response. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response. As claim support data, the advertiser provided copy of an e:mail referring to the celebrity approval, copy of product licence, and test reports. The claim support data was reviewed by the technical expert of ASCI. The CCC viewed the print advertisement and considered the Advertiser’s response as well as opinion of the Technical expert presented at the meeting. The CCC noted as follows: Claim, ‘Ultimate Solution for Hair Fall’ – The advertiser attributes the claim as a testimonial by the celebrity Sania Mirza, however Copy of Signed document by Ms Sania Mirza was not provided as evidence. The CCC did not agree that the claim should be seen as an individual opinion about the product especially if it is not supported by rigorous studies and claim support data. The word ‘Ultimate’ was considered to be an absolute claim by the CCC and the word suggests that the advertised product is the final solution and nothing else could be considered beyond it. The CCC concluded that this claim is not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. Claim, “Recommended by world’s best hair experts” – For “World’s best hair experts”, the Advertiser has cited names of some individuals however, on what basis the advertiser is claiming them to be the world’s best was not established. The CCC concluded that this claim was not substantiated adequately and is misleading by ambiguity. Testimonial claim, ‘“my hairfall problem is now solved. I win against hairfall every time”, the disclaimer says * hairfall due to hair breakage”. The CCC noted that while the main headline and body copy refer to hair fall, it is hiding material information such as this hair fall is due to only hair breakage (and not due to hair loss from the roots). The CCC opined that for a product being positioned as a scalp and hair medicine, calling hair breakage as hair fall is misleading by ambiguity. The disclaimer in the advertisement contravened Clauses 2 and 3 of the ASCI’s Guidelines for Disclaimers. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI code, and ASCI Guidelines for disclaimers. These complaints were UPHELD. The claims, “5 Hair problems – 1 Ayurvedic Solution”, “With 21 Ayurvedic Herbs”, “Scalp and Hair medicine”, were substantiated. This complaint was NOT UPHELD."

 

COMPANY: "Kanodia Oil Mills Pvt. Ltd"
PRODUCT:"Kanodia Rice Bran Oil"

COMPLAINT:

"“1. Improving skin tone and delays wrinkles. 2. Cleaner blood vessels. 3. Anti-Cancer Properties.”"

NATURE OF COMPLAINT:

Recommendation: UPHELD

"The ASCI approached the advertiser for their response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for Personal Hearing with the ASCI Secretariat. The advertiser representatives did not seek personal hearing. The CCC also noted that no response was received from the advertiser prior to the due date for this complaint. The CCC viewed the advertisement. In the absence of comments from the Advertiser, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Improving skin tone and delays wrinkles”, “Cleaner blood vessels”, “Anti-Cancer Properties”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy and are misleading by exaggeration. The advertisement contravened Chapters I.1 and I.4 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD."

 
 

 

DID YOU KNOW?