Free 3-Pce Oriental Knife Set (excl p&p)

I WAS tempted till I read the following.





A complaint, objecting to a magazine advertisement for Advanced Direct Information Services Ltd t/a Jean-Patrique Professional Cookware was upheld in five of the seven objections according to published details from the Advertising Standards Authority.

Complaint:
Objections to a magazine advertisement, for kitchen knives, that was headed 'A complete 14-piece professional knife set offered to you at 73% below its normal retail price, for just £99 ... postage and packing per order £9.95'. The complainants challenged the claims:

1. ' ... offered to you at 73%" below its normal retail price ...', because they believed the knives were not available at retail outlets;

2. ' ... Each knife is forged to give you perfect weight balance and handling ...', because they believed the handles of the knife were hollow;

3. ' ... An exceptional degree of sharpness ...';

4. ' ... Direct from the manufacturer ...', because they believed the advertisers did not make the knives;

5. ' ... Judge for yourself - risk free ...', because they believed customers would be charged for carriage if they returned the knives;

6. '... Entirely Hand-made ...', because they did not think that was possible and

7. '...the award winning designed wooden solid block ...'.

Adjudication:

1. Complaints upheld
The advertisers said the knives were sold at The Professional Cookware Company retail shop in Cheltenham. They sent photographs of the shop front and of the knives displayed for sale in the shop; they sent a price list that showed the cost of the knives when sold individually. The advertisers pointed out that the knives, when sold individually and when sold in the shop as a set, cost £363.30 and maintained that the advertised price of £99 was 73% below the normal retail price. The Authority noted the advertisers had sent evidence to show the knives on display in one retail outlet and understood from the advertisers that the knives were available, at the retail price, from that outlet only. It nevertheless considered that the claim implied the knives were generally available from retail outlets at the price of £363.30. Because the advertisers had sent evidence to show the knives on display in one store only, the Authority was not satisfied that the advertisers had justified the claim ' ... offered to you at 73% below its normal retail price ...' and told them not to repeat it.

2. Complaints upheld
The advertisers believed the claim did not imply that the handle of the knife was solid; they said the claim was intended to convey that the blade of the knife was forged to the handle. The advertisers believed that the design ensured the knife had perfect weight balance and handling. The Authority considered that the advertisers' explanation that the knife blade was forged to the handle did not prove that the knife had perfect weight, balance and handling. The Authority concluded that the advertisers had not substantiated the claim and told them not to state that the knives had 'perfect weight, balance and handling' unless they could prove that was true.

3. Complaints upheld
The advertisers maintained that their knives were exceptionally sharp. They argued that manufacturers of cheaper knives merely sharpened the last few millimetres of the blade, whereas their knives were sharpened to the cutting edge through three different processes to ensure the knives were exceptionally sharp. The Authority noted the advertisers' explanation of how their knives were sharpened. It considered, however, that readers would interpret the claim to mean that the advertisers' knives were sharper than competitors' similar knives. Because they had not sent evidence to show their knives were sharper than those of their competitors, the Authority considered that the advertisers had not substantiated the claim. It asked the advertisers not to repeat the claim unless they held evidence to prove it.

4. Complaints not upheld
The advertisers said they designed, manufactured and sold the knives. They explained that they contracted the manufacture of the knives to a factory in China and distributed them through a fulfilment centre. The advertisers sent a letter and a sales confirmation form from the factory and despatch labels and an order cancellation report from their fulfilment centre to substantiate the claim. They said they had intended the claim to convey that the knives were being sold direct from the manufacturers to the customer without the additional cost of buying from wholesalers or selling through retail outlets. The advertisers sent evidence to show that they commissioned the factory in China to make knives to their design and to confirm that the knives were not sold to any other company in the UK. The Authority noted the advertisers designed the knives, commissioned a factory to make them and were the sole distributors of the knives in the UK. It considered that the advertisers could be said to be the manufacturers of the knives and accepted the claim.

5. Complaints upheld
The advertisers argued that it was standard mail order practice not to refund customers the cost of postage and packing and believed the claim did not mislead. They pointed out that, beneath the claim 'Judge for yourself at home - risk free', the text stated '... just return your knife unused within 30 days for a full refund of the price of the product'. The Authority considered that the claim implied customers could buy the product and incur no financial risk. Because customers placed an order without seeing the goods but were charged a non-refundable fee of £9.95 for postage and packing, the Authority considered that the claim 'Risk Free' was misleading and told the advertisers not to repeat it.

6. Complaints upheld
The advertisers said the claim was intended to make clear that the knives were not created using fully automated machinery. They said that, from the initial step to the cutting, shaping, polishing and finish of the knives, human hands used tools to complete each process. The advertisers sent a letter from their factory, which explained how the knives were made. The Authority noted the advertisers' assertion that the production process involved humans at every stage but considered that, because the knives were mass-produced using machinery, the claim 'entirely hand-made' was likely to mislead. It asked the advertisers not to repeat the claim.

7. Complaints not upheld
The advertisers said they received the award from a Chinese organisation called 'China North Industries Zhanjiang Corporation' for 'Outstanding Design and contribution to their exports'; they sent a copy of the award certificate. The Authority noted the certificate had been awarded to the Chinese factory that made the advertisers' knives and wooden block and accepted the claim.


Riz

Anyone recieved theirs yet?

Not checked yet Huggins, will check soon though.

i have had 9.99 taken out of my visa from nochex ltd leeds witch is an online payment site but i cant remember if it was for these knives or not can anyone shed any light ?

Well, I got mine this week, after about a 2 month wait!

Seem very good for £8 though!