Inde Wild Private Limited - Inde Wild

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: Consumer Organization

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the claims in the advertisement, or alternately to substantiate the claims with supporting data. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and replied seeking for an extension to submit their response. As a special gesture, the advertiser was given additional two business days to respond. The advertiser in their response stated that the “award winning” claim is based on independent third-party recognitions and editorial selections from reputed publications and does not imply superiority or any statutory endorsement. The claim regarding creation by an Ayurvedic practitioner and being “perfected over 40 years” reflects the traditional origin and experiential knowledge informing the formulation, and does not suggest that the commercial product has existed or been tested for that duration. The claim “loved by thousands” is a subjective promotional expression supported by positive consumer feedback across public platforms. In support of their response, advertiser provided advertisement copy, product packaging images, clinical study Report, product approval license, awards details. The ASCI Secretariat requested the advertiser to provide supporting evidence for the claims made. In response, the advertiser submitted that the claim is supported by awards received for the product, supported by evidence of the awarding organisations. With regard to the claim, “Created by an Ayurvedic practitioner mom, perfected over 40 years”, it refers to an ayurvedic practitioner with over 40 years of experience, and that the product formulation is inspired by her traditional champi recipe rooted in ayurvedic principles and traditional practice. The claim “Loved by thousands”, is supported by a substantial volume of positive consumer feedback across public platforms. The advertiser further submitted documents on award certificates and event confirmations, Champi Masterclasses and traditional practices, and consumer reviews from public platforms. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the Instagram advertisement, considered the complaint, and the advertiser’s response. Claim - “Award winning in the country of hair oiling” The CCC observed that the advertiser submitted award certificates, event confirmations, emails from awarding bodies, and editorial mentions from Elle India Beauty Awards, Self Healthy Beauty Awards, and Grazia Indie Beauty Superstars. However, the submission did not include supporting data on the awards selection process, criteria for granting the awards, survey methodology, parameters considered, questionnaires used, names of other hair oil products included in the survey, survey outcomes, and details of the awarding body. Additionally, the advertisement did not indicate the name of the organisation providing the award and the month and year in which the award was conferred. Claim – “Created by an Ayurvedic practitioner mom, perfected over 40 years” The CCC observed that the documents provided, including event posters, presentations, images, and social media content, do not provide verified evidence of the practitioner’s credentials and documented records of the formulation over the claimed 40 years. Claim – “Loved by thousands” The CCC observed that the data submitted on consumer reviews and ratings from public platforms were insufficient to support the claim, as there was no independent verification, audited figures, or clear methodology to substantiate the product’s popularity among consumers. Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the said claims were inadequately substantiated. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The claims in the advertisement contravened Chapter I, Clauses 1.1, 1.2, 1.4 and 1.5 of the ASCI Code. This complaint was UPHELD.