Eye don't belieeeeve it!, Geraint Lloyd-Taylor

Critics will claim that I wrote this short article simply in order to use that headline and a load of eye-sight type puns. Well, it's one in the eye for the critics because it's actually a mildly interesting and very topical ruling... because it was published today and, um... well... that's it really.

The ruling was published today but it relates to a paid-for Facebook ad from February 2023. It involves an ad by Fancy Drops Community, an online retailer of cosmetic eye products. It advertised eye drops which, it claimed, would change your eye colour.

The ad stated, “SOLD OUT 5 TIMES – and for a good reason. You will throw away your color [sic] contacts! Introducing the revolutionary color [sic] changing product … Fancy Drops reduces even the dark brown eye color [sic] who want light eye color [sic] …”.

Move along please, nothing to see here

One person, who didn't see eye to eye with Fancy Drops complained to the ASA, challenging the claim that the eye drops could change the colour of eyes. They thought it was likely to be misleading and doubted the claim could be substantiated.

Reading between the lines, it seems they had the foresight not to buy the product to try it for themselves.

Don't 'contacts' us, we'll contacts you...

Fancy Drops Co did not respond to the ASA’s enquiries.... which ironically meant the ASA saw red.

If you are ever tempted to ignore an approach by the ASA, you should know they will simply uphold the complaint against you on sight... ok, not quite. The ASA will consider whether the complaint has any merit first; but if it does, and it seems worth investigating, the ASA will be in touch. If you fail to respond, they will consider that a breach of CAP Code (Edition 12) rule 1.7 (Unreasonable delay) in and of itself.

The ASA sometimes sends the notice to the wrong email address, or it might not be seen by human eyes for a long time, but it's usually no good arguing you didn't see the initial letter, the ASA is fairly unsympathetic, and hindsight is 20/20!

Focus

The ASA was concerned by FancyDrops Co’s "lack of response and apparent disregard for the Code", which as I've mentioned was a breach of CAP Code in and of itself. The ASA "reminded them of their responsibility to respond promptly to our enquiries and told them to do so in future".

The ASA considered readers would interpret the ad to mean that using the eye drops would have the effect of changing the user’s eye colour, including from dark to light.

FancyDrops Co did not provide any evidence to demonstrate that their product had that effect. The ASA therefore concluded that the claim had not been substantiated and was misleading.