Krutine Ventures Private Limited - CleanoDry

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: Suo Motu - NAMS (TAMS)

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the objections raised in the complaint. 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 submitted their response. The advertiser in their response stated that, “We would like to inform you that we use Electrolux Professional machines in our processing centre. As mentioned by Electrolux, these machines use cleaner and more efficient technology (reduced consumption), therefore making them eco-friendly”. As claim support data, the advertiser provided a document on Electrolux machine, processes and their certifications. The advertiser also shared a link for details on Electrolux Professional machines used for cleaning. The ASCI Secretariat requested the advertiser to provide supporting data for claiming their cleaning process to be eco-friendly. In the absence of this data, the advertiser was advised to withdraw the claims so that this complaint could be resolved under IR mechanism. However, the advertiser did not respond within the given timelines. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the Facebook advertisement (https://www.facebook.com/ads/library/?id=1173670507660406) considered the complaint and the advertiser’s response. The CCC observed that the advertiser has clarified that the claims of "Eco-Friendly Cleaning" and "Eco-friendly process" refer to the use of Electrolux machines with cleaner and more efficient technology that reduces consumption. The garments and shoes treated with lagoon® Advanced Care could be eco-friendly, but it does not claim that the entire cleaning process is eco-friendly. The CCC discussed that the advertiser is offering dry cleaning and laundry services. However, there was no supporting evidence provided, such as robust data or credible, well-recognized certifications, to substantiate the claims that their cleaning process is genuinely eco-friendly or provides a meaningful environmental benefit. The CCC further discussed that there was no data provided to show that these environmental claims are based on a comprehensive evaluation of the entire cleaning process. This includes not only the cleaning methods themselves but also any materials used, and whether these contribute to an environmentally friendly outcome. Without this supporting evidence, the advertiser has not sufficiently demonstrated that their cleaning process is truly eco-friendly. Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the claims, “Eco-Friendly Cleaning”, and “Eco-friendly process”, were not substantiated. The claims are misleading by exaggeration and are likely to lead to widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The said claims contravened Chapter I, Clauses 1.1, 1.4 and 1.5 of the ASCI Code, and Clauses 1 and 3 of the ASCI Guidelines For Advertisements Making Environmental/Green claims. This complaint was UPHELD. .