CONSUMER COMPLAINTS COUNCIL (CCC) by bqj34846

VIEWS: 67 PAGES: 8

									COMPLAINTS THAT
WERE UPHELD BY THE
CONSUMER
COMPLAINTS
COUNCIL (CCC)



April 2007 to June 2007
     COMPLAINTS THAT WERE UPHELD BY THE CONSUMER
               COMPLAINTS COUNCIL (CCC)
                                      From April 2007 to June 2007

                  Advertisements Modified Appropriately / Withdrawn / Concluded



Sr.      Advertiser /             Claim / Description                                                   ASCI Code/
                                                                         Complaint
No      Agency / Media                of Ad/ TVC                                                       CCC Decision

1.     Nestle India Ltd(*)       Claims – “Happy Heart”,      This creates an impression that        April 2007
       (Maggie Healthy           “Healthy Soups”              consumption of Maggi soups lead        Chapter I.4.
#      Soups – Soup                                           to better heart health. On an          Claim, “Happy
       powder)                                                independent testing, the product       Heart”, was
                                 “REAL (Centre for Right      has been found to contain high         misleading by
       Publicis India(*)         Eating & Active Lifestyle,   levels of salt which releases          implication.
                                 A Unit of DFI) recognizes    sodium into the body. Sodium is        Claim, “REAL
       Femina(*)                 that soups which are low     well known for direct link to          recognizes that soups
       (31/1/07)                 in Fat & Cholesterol help    hypertension / high blood pressure     which are low in Fat
       Zee Studio(*)             heart stay healthy”          which is not desirable for a healthy   & Cholesterol help
       (8/1/07)                                               heart.                                 heart stay healthy”,
       HBO                                                                                           was misleading by
       (12/1/07)                                              The pack/communication does not        ambiguity.
                                                              give any details of DFI or REAL to
       Promotion messages                                     substantiate its credibility. It is    Advertiser assured
       on the pack                                            neither an International Body nor      appropriate
                                                              any Centre recognized by the           modification of the
                                                              Government of India as a               press Ad, TVC, and
                                                              competent authority to take a stand    promotion messages
                                                              on heart health.                       on the pack.



2.     Suzuki Motorcycle         Visuals - “a biker driving   Advertisement       does       not     April 2007
       India Pvt Ltd             the motorcycle on the lane   communicate good traffic sense.        Chapter III.3.
       (Suzuki Zeus              dividing the white line,     Advertisement shows dangerous          Action sequences as
       Motorcycle)               then            overtaking   acts which if emulated by              depicted in the TVC,
                                 dangerously between 2        inexperienced riders, may cause        shows dangerous
       Grey Worldwide (I)        trucks and rashly cutting    injury.                                practices and
       Pvt Ltd(*)                the lane”.                                                          manifest a disregard
                                                              (Two similar complaints received       for safety without
       Aaj Tak(*)                                             against the same TVC).                 justifiable reason.
       (14/3/2007)
                                                                                                     TVC modified.




# Intra-Industry Complaints   * ASCI Member   $ Complaint received from Consumer Representational Organisation
3.     Gujarat Co-operative      Words – “Sugar Free”          The branding unit has been designed in     CCC considered the
       Milk Marketing                                          such a way that `Sugar Free’ appears to    prevailing situation of a
#      Federation Ltd(*)                                       be a brand of `Amul’ rather than a         Suit filed in the Delhi
                                                               qualifier/descriptor to the product        High Court between the
       (Amul Sugar Free                                        being advertised. There appears to be      two parties (Advertiser
       Probiotic Frozen                                        a clear effort in anchoring the branding   and the Complainant),
       Dessert)                                                exercise on `Sugar Free’ and               on a similar complaint
                                                               leveraging its goodwill.                   of the “advertiser’s
       FCB-Ulka                                                                                           advertisement with the
       Advertising(*)            Ad Headline – “Sugar          These phrases are similar to the line,     branding `Amul Sugar
                                 Free. Guilt Free. Worry       “Indulge Guilt Free”, that the             Free’     taking unfair
       Times Life(*)             Free”                         Complainant uses in all the collaterals    advantage      of     the
       supplement                                              of `Sugar Free” in case of exhibitions     goodwill       of     the
                                                               and promotions.                            complainant’s product
       (28/1/07), Economic                                                                                Sugar Free”. It was
       Times(*) – Brand                                                                                   concluded that this
       Equity                                                                                             issue may be considered
       (14/2/07)                                                                                          sub-judice,     by    the
                                                                                                          concerned High Court.
                                                                                                          CCC decided that the
                                                                                                          complaint on this claim,
                                                                                                          would        not       be
                                                                                                          adjudicated on, under
                                                                                                          the            prevailing
                                                                                                          circumstances.

                                                               Claim is misleading. Sugar level in the    April 2007
                                 Claim - “Now, eat all you     body is not only associated with           Upheld.
                                 want, and don’t worry about   “sugar” but also with the consumption      Chapter I.4.
                                 the fluctuations in sugar     of milk/milk derivatives, and other        Claim was misleading.
                                 level”                        ingredients like Figs which is a rich
                                                               source of calories, dried figs being       As for the declarations
                                                               50% sugar could enhance the blood          on the pack, their
                                                               glucose levels.                            conformity with the
                                                                                                          F&D             labeling
                                                               Neither the product – Amul Sugar Free      requirements is an issue
                                                               nor any of the communication about         which is left to the
                                                               the product, mentions the basic            concerned authorities to
                                                               requirements – “Contains artificial        address.
                                                               sweetener and for calorie conscious.
                                                               Contains      Sucralose.          Not      Advertiser assured
                                                               recommended for children”, as laid out     that Ad discontinued,
                                                               by PFA Act 1954.                           and the claim is
                                                                                                          being modified.




# Intra-Industry Complaints   * ASCI Member   $ Complaint received from Consumer Representational Organisation
4.     United Breweries Ltd      Ad Headline – “Where         In the absence of specific             April 2007
       (Kingfisher               the Night Rocks”,            information, the advertisement         Chapter III.6.
Suo    Premium)                  “Packaged         Drinking   appears to be a surrogate              Visual     and     the
motu
                                 Water” (in fine print).      advertisement for a liquor brand –     headline, did not bear
       The Week(*)                                            Kingfisher Premium.                    any relevance to the
       (31/12/2006)              Visual depicts “a dancing                                           product advertised –
                                 couple”                                                             Kingfisher Premium
                                                                                                     – packaged drinking
                                 Visual depiction of brand                                           water.
                                 name of a liquor product                                            Advertisement
                                 – Kingfisher Premium.                                               appeared to be a
                                                                                                     surrogate
                                                                                                     advertisement for a
                                                                                                     liquor     brand     –
                                                                                                     Kingfisher Premium.

                                                                                                     Ad withdrawn.




5.     Diageo India P.           Ad shows the brand name      This bears no relation to the          April 2007
       Ltd(*)                    of a liquor product –        product/service - Super Scorer         Chapter III.6(b).
Suo    (Johnnie Walker)          Johnnie Walker.              Contest, being promoted.               Advertisement was a
motu
                                 Ad mentions, “CDs and                                               surrogate
       Leo Burnett(*)            Cassettes”                                                          advertisement for a
                                                                                                     liquor product –
       The Times of              Ad     mentions,     “Red    Appears to be associated with `Red     Johnnie Walker.
       India(*)                  Label”                       Label’ liquor brand.
       (March 07)                                             Advertisement appears to be a          Ad withdrawn.
                                                              surrogate advertisement for a
                                                              liquor brand – Johnnie Walker.




6.     United Spirits Ltd(*)     Ad states - “Indulge in      This is suggestive of over             April 2007
       (Antiquity)               Blue Antiquity”              consumption of aged product and        Chapter III.6(b).
Suo                                                           Blue Antiquity being a brand           Advertisement was a
motu
       Bombay Times(*)                                        name of a liquor product.              surrogate
       (3/3/2007)                Ad mentions, “Cassettes                                             advertisement for a
                                 and CDS”, but shows no       Advertisement appears to be a          liquor product –
                                 visual depiction of the      surrogate advertisement for a          Antiquity.
                                 same.                        liquor brand – Antiquity.
                                                                                                     Advertiser informed
                                                                                                     that the campaign is
                                                                                                     being suspended
                                                                                                     temporarily as
                                                                                                     regards new Ads.
                                                                                                     The existing Ads are
                                                                                                     being withdrawn.


# Intra-Industry Complaints   * ASCI Member   $ Complaint received from Consumer Representational Organisation
7.     GlaxoSmithKline           Claims - “Essential for      Claims need to be substantiated.       May 2007
       Consumer Healthcare       your      health   during                                           Chapters I.1 and I.4.
Suo    Ltd(*)                    exams”,                                                             Claims mentioned in
motu
       (Horlicks Exam ka         “Horlicks is clinically                                             the advertisement,
       Bhoot Bhagao)             proven      to   improve                                            and cited in the
                                 attention             and                                           complaint, were false
       Free Press Journal        concentration”,                                                     and not substantiated.
       (28/3/2007)               “Horlicks helps kids                                                Also, the claims were
                                 prepare better for their                                            misleading by gross
                                 exams”.                                                             exaggeration.

                                                                                                     Advertiser advised
                                                                                                     that said Ad has
                                                                                                     been presently
                                                                                                     discontinued.




8.     Besure Medicine           Claims - “Dr. K.K.’s         (Complaint       received      from    May 2007
       Mfg Ltd                   Besure 100% Natural          individual consumer, but referred      Chapters I.1, I.4 and
       (Dr. K.K.’s Besure        Health Drink for Diabetic    by a GOI department)                   III.3.
       Health Drink – Aloe       Patients”,                   Advertisement appears to claim         Claims mentioned in
       Vera Gel)                 “Visible results in 7        treatment for `Diabetes’, a disease    the advertisement,
                                 days”,                       which is mentioned in Schedule of      were false, and
       The Times of              “Complete course 60          the Drugs & Magic Remedies             misleading by gross
       India(*)                  days”.                       (Objectionable      Advertisements)    exaggeration.
       (25/10/06, 29/10/06)                                   Act, 1954.                             Advertisement was
                                                              Advertisement claiming treatment       likely to encourage
                                                              for such a disease is banned, as per   negligence without
                                                              the public notice issued by the        justifiable reason.
                                                              Ministry of Health And Family
                                                              Welfare.                               As for the
                                                              The advertisement is misleading        advertisement being
                                                              and is in contravention of the         in contravention of
                                                              provisions of the said Act.            the provisions of The
                                                                                                     Drugs & Magic
                                                                                                     Remedies
                                                                                                     (Objectionable
                                                                                                     Advertisements) Act,
                                                                                                     1954, this is an issue
                                                                                                     which is left to the
                                                                                                     concerned authorities
                                                                                                     to address.

                                                                                                     Ad withdrawn.


# Intra-Industry Complaints   * ASCI Member   $ Complaint received from Consumer Representational Organisation
9.    Dr. Batra’s Positive   Ad shows a testimonial of    (Complaint       received      from    May 2007
      Health Clinic P. Ltd   a patient – “My white        individual consumer, but referred      Chapters I.1, I.4 and
      (60% improvement in    patches showed 60%           by a GOI department)                   III.3.
      white patches)         improvement in just 6        Advertisement appears to claim         Claim was false, and
                             months…”                     treatment for `white patches’, a       misleading by gross
      Dattaram                                            disease which is mentioned in          exaggeration.
      Advertising(*)                                      Schedule of the Drugs & Magic          Advertisement was
                                                          Remedies              (Objectionable   likely to encourage
      The Times of                                        Advertisements) Act, 1954.             negligence without
      India(*)                                            Advertisement claiming treatment       justifiable reason.
      (19/10/2006)                                        for such a disease is banned, as per
                                                          the public notice issued by the        As for the
                                                          Ministry of Health And Family          advertisement being
                                                          Welfare.                               in contravention of
                                                          Advertisement is misleading and is     the provisions of The
                                                          in contravention of the provisions     Drugs & Magic
                                                          of the said Act.                       Remedies
                                                                                                 (Objectionable
                                                                                                 Advertisements) Act,
                                                                                                 1954, this is an issue
                                                                                                 which is left to the
                                                                                                 concerned authorities
                                                                                                 to address.

                                                                                                 Ad withdrawn.



10.   Dr. Batra’s Positive   Advertisement shows a        (Complaint       received      from    May 2007
      Health Clinic P. Ltd   testimonial of a patient –   individual consumer, but referred      Chapters I.1, I.4 and
      (Cure for breathing    “I am completely cured of    by a GOI department)                   III.3.
      disorders)             my               breathing   Advertisement appears to claim         Claim was false, and
                             disorders…”                  treatment for `breathing disorders’,   misleading by gross
      Dattaram                                            a disease which is mentioned in        exaggeration.
      Advertising(*)                                      Schedule of the Drugs & Magic          Advertisement was
                                                          Remedies              (Objectionable   likely to encourage
      The Times of                                        Advertisements) Act, 1954.             negligence without
      India(*)                                            Advertisement claiming treatment       justifiable reason.
      (15/10/2006)                                        for such a disease is banned, as per
                                                          the public notice issued by the        As for the
                                                          Ministry of Health And Family          advertisement being
                                                          Welfare.                               in contravention of
                                                          Advertisement is misleading and is     the provisions of The
                                                          in contravention of the provisions     Drugs & Magic
                                                          of the said Act.                       Remedies
                                                                                                 (Objectionable
                                                                                                 Advertisements) Act,
                                                                                                 1954, this is an issue
                                                                                                 which is left to the
                                                                                                 concerned authorities
                                                                                                 to address.

                                                                                                 Ad withdrawn.
11.    Diageo India P.           Advertisement has a           Complainant from his mobile           June 2007
       Ltd(*)                    question – “When did          SMS’d choice `b’ to 3636. He was      Exparte (absence of
       (The Haig Vintage         Henry Ford perfect the        shocked to get a reply back saying,   comments from the
       Rally)                    assembly line?”, to which     “Thank you for participating in the   Advertiser).
                                 there are three choices       Haig Vintage Rally contest. If you    Chapters I.5(f) and
       Grey Worldwide(*)         given as answers. The         are a lucky winner, we will inform    I.4.
                                 advertisement       states,   you shortly”.      This reply is      No proof or evidence
       Hindustan Times(*),       “SMS your answer, e.g.        absolutely cheating the customers,    of the claim/offer
       New Delhi                 (HAIG_a) to 3636. And         as the advertisement clearly says     being complied with,
       (31/3/2007)               win a fantastic Haig          `SMS your answer and win a car        was provided by the
                                 Vintage/Classic        Car    model’.                               Advertiser/Ad.
                                 Model”.                       The advertisement is misleading.      Agency. Also, the
                                                                                                     advertisement    was
                                                                                                     misleading        by
                                                                                                     ambiguity.

                                                                                                     Advertiser assured
                                                                                                     that no such Ad will
                                                                                                     be released in future,
                                                                                                     to avoid any
                                                                                                     contravention of the
                                                                                                     ASCI Code.




12.    Bakson’s                  Ad shows Bakson’s as          Advertiser needs to substantiate      June 2007
       Homoeopathic Centre       having appeared on the        this claim and provide the month      Chapter I.1.
$      For Allergy               front page of `TIME’          and year when it appeared in TIME     Claims, “World’s 1st
       (Bakson’s                 magazine.                     magazine.                             Chain of Allergy
       Homoeopathy)                                                                                  Treatment Clinics”,
                                 Claims - “World’s 1st         Claims need to be substantiated       and “Over 1.5 million
       The Times of              chain     of      Allergy     with proof, data from the research    smiling patients”,
       India(*), Delhi           Treatment Clinics”,           conducted by an independent           were not
       (18/11/2006)              “Over 1.5 million smiling     agency.                               substantiated.
                                 patients”
                                                                                                     Advertiser assured
                                 Claim - “International        Claim needs to be substantiated.      that these claims will
                                 Standard       Quality        Advertiser has not mentioned the      not be repeated in
                                 Certification”                ISO year and standard, and also the   their future
                                                               institute which has given the         advertisements.
                                                               certificate to Bakson that it         Also, a replica of
                                                               complies     with     international   Time magazine cover
                                                               standards quality.                    will not be used
                                                                                                     again in their
                                                                                                     advertisements.


# Intra-Industry Complaints   * ASCI Member   $ Complaint received from Consumer Representational Organisation
13.     Reliance                 Visuals     -    "children    Advertisement appears to unfairly     June 2007
        Communications           making paper toys with        denigrate other products.             Chapters IV.1(d) &
        Ltd(*)                   Indian inland letters and                                           (e).
        (Reliance PCO)           postal covers, and that the                                         Advertisement was
                                 postal letters are not                                              misleading as a result
        Mudra Comm(*)            required since Reliance                                             of comparison and
                                 have opened millions of                                             unfairly denigrated
        Sun TV                   PCOs".                                                              another product.
        (May 07)
                                                                                                     TVC modified.


# Intra-Industry Complaints   * ASCI Member   $ Complaint received from Consumer Representational Organisation




Secretary General

Date:    8th August 2007

								
To top