BBB National Programs Archive
ERSP Refers Suarez Corporation Industries To FTC
New York, NY – May 29, 2007 – The Electronic Retailing Self-Regulation Program (ERSP) has referred advertising by Suarez Corporation Industries, marketer of the EdenPURE Air Purif ier (EdenPURE), to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), following the marketer’s failure to comply with a previous ERSP decision.
The compliance proceeding stemmed from a 2006 inquiry during which ERSP requested substantiation for several performance and comparative advertising claims included in print and Website advertising for the EdenPURE Air Purifier.
ERSP, the electronic direct-response industry’s self-regulatory forum, is administered by the Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB) with policy oversight by the National Advertising Review Council (NARC).
Claims at issue in the initial inquiry included:
- “Eliminates noticeable pollution in just 15 minutes; Eliminates the most difficult pollution in 24 hours.”
- “…not only eliminates pollution from the air, but also eliminates pollution embedded in walls, ceilings, floors, carpets, furniture, clothing, and on countertops and other surfaces.”
- “eliminates many types of air pollutants, such as dust, smoke, pollen, germs, mold, carbon monoxide, pet dander, viruses, dust mites, odors and much more.”
- “the best and most advanced air purifier on the market.”
- “…and it can eliminate most indoor air pollutants in an area up to 1,000 square feet in size in less than 1 hour.”
At the time, the marketer advised ERSP that it had discontinued the print advertisement but nevertheless agreed “to accept the recommendation in its entirety.”
Subsequently, a consumer brought an almost identical print advertisement to the attention of ERSP and asserted that the marketer had not complied with ERSP’s decision.
ERSP reviewed the current print advertising, as well as testing submitted by the marketer. Following its review, ERSP determined that the claims at issue in the initial inquiry had not been modified. ERSP further determined that the new evidence submitted by the advertiser did not provide a reasonable basis for those claims.
As a result, ERSP determined that by continuing to disseminate advertising that is almost identical to the advertising at issue in the original inquiry and in light of the marketer’s failure to produce reliable evidence supporting the claims being made, the marketer has failed to make a bona fide effort to abide by the ERSP recommendation stated in the 2006 decision. As such, ERSP has referred the matter to the Federal Trade Commission for possible enforcement action pursuant to Section 4.1 (B) of the ERSP Policy and procedures.