UAB POREKTUS - PENALISED FOR THE THIRD TIME FOR MISLEADING ADVERTISING

In its regular session the Competition Council handed down the decision to impose a LTL 30 000 fine upon UAB Porektus for the use of misleading advertising. The fine was imposed in accordance with Art. 5 of the Law on Advertising also on account of the aggravating circumstances - the infringement committed repeatedly within less than year from the previously established infringement for which the company was also fined.

The company is question hereby was, for the published misleading advertising statements, subjected to a fine for the third time. This March UAB Porektus was subjected to a LTL 45 000 fine for promotion of incorrect and unsubstantiated information about the characteristics of a weight-loss method and Metabol Plus pills. In April 2004, the Competition Council recognised the statements in the advertising published by UAB Porektus about Margarita Drozd’s weight-loss method as misleading and imposed upon the company a LTL 30 000 fine. In both cases the company was instructed to deny the misleading statements in the advertising and publish corrective statements to that effect.

The present investigation concerning the actions of UAB Porektus owned by a France-based international Padel France Communication group was initiated by the Competition Council ex officio in May of 2005. The company was promoting the preparation H.C.A. by mailing to potential consumers offers to order the product used to reduce the body weight. The investigation established that the advertising of the preparation contained certain inaccurate and incomplete statements misleading the consumers about the weight-loss efficiency of the H.C.A. preparation and thus affected their economic behaviour by inducing them to acquire the preparation. The advertisements were definitely misleading the consumers by assuring them to be able to loose a definite number of kilograms within a certain period of time, that the lost weight will never regain, and that the method is perfectly efficient with no efforts or physical exercising, dieting, etc. required, - the method being the only and uniquely efficient weight-loss method, etc. Besides, it was established that while distributing the offers to acquire H.C.A. by mail an important piece of information necessary not to mislead the customers was omitted: no note was made of LTL 6.20 for postal delivery services charge upon the picking up the ordered preparation.

Having established that UAB Porektus had infringed Art. 5 of the Law on Advertising the Competition Council imposed a fine upon the company in the amount of LTL 30 000, and obligated the infringer to immediately cease the infringement and publish appropriate corrective statements in respect of the misleading advertising.