Advertisment
The advertisement appeared as a brochure which was included as a fold-in in various local newspapers. The brochure featured both text and imagery, as well as an order form to be returned.
The first page of the brochure was a letter from a member of the organisation to readers and stated:
“Which septic tank will be fined – Yours or your neighbours? [Sic.]
Last year, over 52% of all households failed their septic tank inspections. This means that one in every two households face heavy fines, prosecutions and expensive repair work. So will it be you or your neighbour?
And why do you need to do this now? Because new water laws mean the county council is inspecting all septic tanks right now and if you need to replace yours, it could cost up to €10,000, plus fines.
On the other hand, keeping your septic tank working perfectly doesn’t take a lot of money, or effort. All you need to do is flush one sachet of Muck Munchers down the toilet every month and then forget about it. Each sachet contains billions of healthy little microorganisms that:
• Speed up the breakdown of organic solids and digest waste
• Reduce septic tank waste by up to 97%
• Help clean your entire system, preventing blockages and odours
• Neutralise the harmful detergents and bleaches that block your tank
Even better, we’ll give you everything you need to keep your tank working for an entire year. Then we’ll send you a reminder every month.
Muck Munchers is non-toxic, non-hazardous, non-corrosive and 100% environmentally friendly. So how do you get it? We’ll send you a 12-month supply of Muck Munchers when you:
1. Place your order in the prepaid envelope
2. Or call us on [redacted]
3. Or email [redacted]
The best idea is to move to a subscription – we’ll send you everything you need every month and you’ll never forget to order again PLUS you can cancel at any time without charge. Do it now before you forget and before it becomes a problem.”
The second page of the brochure went into further detail about the Muck Munchers product itself and stated:
“What is Muck Munchers?
Muck Munchers is an Irish breakthrough in septic tank cleaning. It uses natural bacteria to help break down organic solids in your system, exactly as your septic tank was designed to do. Modern detergents and cleaning solutions kill that bacteria so you need to keep topping them up. That’s what Muck Munchers does, with billions of harmless but helpful little micro-organisms that munch their way through your waste. Brilliant.
How does it work?
The little Muck Munchers literally eat through the waste in your septic tank, reducing it to harmless water and organic waste. As it works, it cleans your system, preventing blockages, overflows and bad smells.
How do I use it?
We’ll give you a year’s supply of Muck Munchers. Every month, say on the 15th, you simply empty one sachet into a toilet in your house. Wait a few minutes and then flush. The powerful and totally natural microorganisms will find their way into every part of your system. It’s simple, it’s easy and it could save you a small fortune.
Why do I need Muck Munchers?
If you have a septic tank, you need Muck Munchers. Right now, all county councils are inspecting all septic tanks under The Water Services (Amendment) Act. Last year, an amazing 52% of septic tanks failed to comply with the latest EU regulations resulting in prosecutions, fines and expensive repairs.
Compare this:
Fine: €200
Legal costs: €300
Tank clean out: €200
New soakaway: €3,000
New septic tank: €10,000
To this:
One year’s supply of Muck Munchers €49.99
Muck Munchers makes a lot of sense, doesn’t it?”
The third page of the brochure featured diagrams explaining how the Muck Munchers product worked, and the fourth page of the brochure included customer testimonials, as well as the product order form to be returned by the reader.
Complaint
Two complaints were received against the advertising with two issues being identified.
Issue 1:
Both complainants considered that the advertisement grossly exaggerated the risk and consequences of prosecution with the aim of frightening consumers into purchasing the product on offer.
Issue 2:
One complainant also considered that the advertisement was inaccurate and therefore misleading. They pointed to the line in the advertisement that “over 52% of all households failed their septic tank inspections” and said that to their knowledge, there were approximately 500 failures out of 500,000 septic tanks leading to a fail rate of only 0.1%. They acknowledged that 52% of the tanks inspected failed, but they pointed out that this was not what was claimed in the advertisement.
In relation to the line “the county council is inspecting all septic tanks right now”, the complainant said that as far as they were aware, just over 1,000 inspections were carried out last year and that out of 500,000 septic tanks, this led to a figure of less than 0.2% which was very far from “all septic tanks” as claimed in the advert.
Referring to the claims that the use of Muck Munchers would keep septic tanks “working perfectly” and that all that was required was to flush the product down the toilet once a month, the complainant said no matter what chemical action was elicited from the product, this would not be enough to make good any physical shortcomings or defects in a tank. Furthermore, the complainant said that while a particular chemical action occasioned by the content of a sachet might improve or assist the anaerobic digestion within the tank, it could not reduce the quantity of liquid effluent discharged from the tank.
The complainant considered that the wording that the product would eat through the waste in a septic tank ultimately reducing it to “harmless water and organic waste” was misleading as while the quality of waste could be improved, there would always be a residue and little or no reduction in the concentration of phosphates or other similar pollutants.
Response
The advertisers did not provide a response to the Executive’s request for comments.
Conclusion
The Complaints Council considered the detail of the complaints. They expressed concern at the advertisers’ failure to respond to the complaints. They reminded them that there was an onus on advertisers to ensure that their advertising was in conformity with the Code.
Issue 1 – Upheld.
The Complaints Council noted the Code requirement that a marketing communication should not cause fear or distress without good reason, such as for example, the encouragement of prudent behaviour or the discouragement of dangerous or ill-advised actions. In such cases, the fear aroused should not be disproportionate to the risk.
The Council noted the wording used in the advertisement in relation to fines resulting from failed inspections. They also noted the tone of urgency used for this wording such as, “the county council is inspecting all septic tanks right now”. The Council considered that in the absence of substantiation demonstrating the accuracy of these figures, the wording and tone used had the potential to pressure consumers into purchasing the product by evoking fear that to not do so, and quickly, would result in a substantial fine.
In light of this, and in the absence of a response, the Complaints Council considered that Issue 1 of the complaints was in breach of Code sections 3.03, 3.10 and 3.23.
Issue 2 – Upheld.
The Council noted the Code requirements that advertisers should not exploit the credulity, inexperience or lack of knowledge of consumers (4.04) and that a marketing communication should not contain claims – whether direct or indirect, expressed or implied – which a consumer would be likely to regard as being objectively true unless the objective truth of the claims can be substantiated (4.09).
The Complaints Council considered that as various claims were made within the advertisement, both in relation to the inspections carried out and fines which could be applied for inspection failures, as well as in relation to the product itself, these claims required substantiation. The Council noted that evidence to support the claims in the advertising had not been submitted to the Advertising Standards Authority and in the light of this, and the absence of a response from the advertisers, the Council concluded that the advertisement was in breach of Code Sections 3.10, 4.01, 4.04, 4.09 and 4.10.
ACTION REQUIRED:
The advertisement must not reappear in its current form.
