Homemark Aragan Oil – no proof

Posted 31 January 2014

A consumer complaint was laid against a Homemark advert which promoted the Homemark’s “Aragan Secret Nail Treatment”, making claims such as: “Cure your nail fungus” and “Homemark’s tried and tested Aragan Secret Nail Treatment with Moroccan oil is guaranteed to clear discoloured nails, treats ingrown nails and gets rid of nail fungus once and for all …”. The complainant submitted that he has searched available literature on the benefits of Aragan oil, and there is nothing to suggest that it has any effect on fungus, or nails in general. 

Homemark was not able to supply any evidence that the product does treat or cure nail fungus. No surprise, it is a Homemark product!

Homemark Aragan Oil / HA Steinman / 22871
Ruling of the : ASA Directorate
In the matter between:
Dr Harris A Steinman Complainant(s)/Appellant(s)
Homemark (Pty) Ltd Respondent

http://www.asasa.org.za/ResultDetail.aspx?Ruling=6769

24 Jan 2014

Dr Steinman lodged a consumer complaint against a Homemark mailer sent to him during November 2013. The mailer promotes the respondent’s “Aragan Secret Nail Treatment”, making claims such as:

“Cure your nail fungus” and “Homemark’s tried and tested Aragan Secret Nail Treatment with Moroccan oil is guaranteed to clear discoloured nails, treats ingrown nails and gets rid of nail fungus once and for all …”

COMPLAINT

The complainant submitted that he has searched available literature on the benefits of Aragan oil, and there is nothing to suggest that it has any effect on fungus, or nails in general. The respondent is a serial offender of the Code of Advertising Practice over many years, and is therefore fully conversant with the Code and its clauses. Sanctions are therefore appropriate.

RELEVANT CLAUSE OF THE CODE OF ADVERTISING PRACTICE

The complainant identified Clause 4.1 of Section II (Substantiation) as relevant.

RESPONSE

The respondent submitted, inter alia, that it has removed the claim “treats ingrown nails and gets rid of nail fungus once and for all” from its website and email campaigns. This claim was made based on literatures that suggest that Tea Tree oil (a component of this product) has antifungal qualities.

It added that it has had no adverse rulings from the Advertising Standards Authority for a number of years and being termed a “serial offender” by the complainant is inappropriate. It always endeavours to comply in full with the Code.

ASA DIRECTORATE RULING

The ASA Directorate considered all the relevant documentation submitted by the respective parties.

Voluntary undertaking

In terms of the Code and a long-standing principle held in previous rulings, the Directorate has discretion in terms of deciding whether or not an unequivocal undertaking to remove or amend the advertising complained of is an adequate resolution to the matter.

The respondent’s undertaking appears to address the complainants’ immediate concerns and there is therefore no need for the Directorate to consider the merits of the matter at this time.

The undertaking is accepted on condition that the advertising and relevant claim is not used again in future in its current format in future.

Request for Sanctions

The respondent is correct in arguing that it has not received adverse rulings from the ASA in recent years. It would appear from a preliminary search on the electronic archives of the ASA that the last ruling against Homemark was issued in 2012, and related to an incident of non-compliance with an existing ruling.

Having said this, the Directorate cannot ignore the fact that over the years, the respondent has received several adverse rulings because of a tendency to make unsubstantiated claims. This tendency, along with a tendency to voluntarily withdraw advertising complained about, resulted in a pre-clearance sanction being imposed on the respondent in 2009 (refer the ruling of the Advertising Standards Committee in Homemark Pure Magic Spa / HA Steinman / 13961 (19 November 2009) for details.

At the moment, the Directorate does not agree that sanctions are warranted, as the respondent does not appear to have advertised in a manner that contravenes the Code in recent years. The Directorate is therefore willing to give the respondent the benefit. It is hoped, however, that the respondent will continue to abide by the principles of the Code of Advertising Practice.

The Directorate therefore does not believe any sanctions are warranted at this time.

CamCheck posts related to Homemark 

15 Responses to Homemark Aragan Oil – no proof

  1. Shannon 27 November, 2014 at 3:51 pm #

    Hi there. Does CamCheck have an app. if you do please let me know where i can download it

    • Harris 27 November, 2014 at 5:11 pm #

      @Shannon
      Unfortunately not!

  2. chris sobolewskif 23 December, 2014 at 8:26 pm #

    A commercial was flighted today on the DSTV National Geographic channel advertising Aragan as treating nail fungus. I was tempted to purchase this product at the advertised retailers, however the complaint listed has made me reconsider. Is the advertising therefore false?

    • Harris 28 December, 2014 at 8:16 am #

      @Chris
      Yes, the advertising is false. Homemark is also breaching an ASA ruling, but then these guys are scam artists and do not bother whether a claim is true or not.

  3. Iaan Crous 19 January, 2015 at 11:23 am #

    I have also bought a bottle of Aragan Secret Nail Treatment from Homemark in Eastrand Mall. I decided to return it per their return policy within 10 days as it was unused. The lady at the store refused to refund me as she claimed the product was opened. The original packaging does not contain a seal and she could therefore not prove it was opened or not. Never the less, I have learnt my lesson and will NEVER buy another Homemark product again.

  4. Jaco 2 March, 2015 at 3:03 pm #

    Takealot is also marketing and selling the Homemark product and promoting the same effect. http://www.takealot.com/remedy-aragan-nail-treatment-by-homemark/PLID27958991

  5. Elzanne 29 September, 2015 at 10:19 pm #

    Hi,I would just like to say that your product is rubbish an it doesn’t do a thing that is promised! I bought it twice an followed the instuctions to a t!! All it did was make my nail worse an ugly, you people are liars an as far as I’m concerned you should be sued for your piece of crap product an all your false advertising! I can’t wear open shoes any more cause of your product ! My nail has even turned brown now! I want my money back for both this rubbish things an I’m going to make sure that yourl get put your product on hello peter firstly an from there see how I can take this matter further ! What rubbish man!
    Signed : angry,dissaticfied costumer

    • Willie 14 January, 2016 at 7:23 am #

      I also bought this rubbish and it did nothing to my nails. it actually got worse. I LEFT TWO COMPLAINTS and they did not even respond. How do we get our money back. The Consumer protecting act should have help us with these complaints. Where do we complaint and how do we take it further. These products should be removed from the shelves as these Company is stealing our money.

  6. Thabang Khumalo 1 October, 2015 at 3:25 pm #

    I have been using Aragan Secret Nail Treatment for the 6th month now and I still haven’t seen any results. I still hide my feet, can’t wear any open sandals or shoes that show my toes. I have ingrown and fungus in my right big toe and my left second toe. Guess it works for others and not for me. And bare in mind it doesn’t come cheap here in SA.

    • Harris 1 October, 2015 at 6:10 pm #

      @Thabang
      There is no proof that this product can do ANYTHING for nail fungus. Appears to be a lie in order to sell this rubbish. Homemark was asked for proof that it worked, they could not.

      • Harris 1 October, 2015 at 9:55 pm #

        Thabang responded: “Thank you! Almost R800 gone down the drain for false hope. What can be done in such instances?”
        Report them to the National Consumer Commission or Consumer Goods and Services Ombud (CGSO)

  7. Willie Beukes 26 October, 2015 at 7:55 am #

    I also bought a bottle of Aragan Nail treatment for the fungus on my nails and have been using it for a onth now. I dont see any change while treating my nails on a daily basis as advertised. I want my money back. This is false advertising.I paid the price as advertised on tellevision and I want something better in return or my money back.

    Regards

  8. Rod Gush 20 November, 2015 at 6:30 pm #

    Aragan is being advertised on Kyknet (DSTV channel 144) as a cure for nail fungus. This clearly in contradiction of the ASA ruling and Homemark should now be taken to the cleaners!

    • Harris 23 November, 2015 at 8:10 am #

      @Rod
      According to my information, Homemark has sent a legal letter of demand, or taking the ASA to court to argue that the ASA has no jurisdiction over their claims. Based on this, the ASA is not taking any further action, or complaints against Homemark. See this article for further context.

  9. Rod Proome 2 February, 2016 at 9:31 pm #

    I agree, Aragan is an absolute hoax. Marketing hype and no substance. I bought 2 bottles and saw absolutely no improvement. Vinegar works better.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.