Re.stor Fights Back Over Misleading Consumer NZ Coverage

In a recent review, Consumer NZ warned customers about laundry detergents that performed “no better than water”. One brand mentioned was re.stor Concentrated Laundry Detergent Sheets Tropical Breeze (60 sheets). Renee Lee, COO at Moxx Brands has issued a response.

“We absolutely stand behind our product. We have done rigorous testing, gathered extensive consumer feedback that has rated us 4.5/5 on cleaning effectiveness and the factory consistently independently tests performance. We also have a 4.9/5 rating on ProductReviews.com.au,” Lee explained.

“Consumer NZ has firstly misled the public and the media by claiming and stating on NewsHub we are ‘more expensive than the leader’ and the ‘most expensive’.  We are actually eighth from the top regarding the pack sizes they’ve included - which proves their statement incorrect.

“But, going further, if they’d actually compared equivalent pack sizes, you’d see Persil Charge $15.50 for 2KG, Ecostore $14 for 2KG and Earthwise $15 for 2L where we charge $12.50 for 60 sheets which is the equivalent of $1.8L/1.8KG, so we’re actually more economical than those brands. Consumer NZ should have easily been able to work that out. As Consumer NZ and James Le Page haven’t done this, it clearly puts in question the desire to accurately test and points more towards wanting a ‘click bait’ headline.

“James Le Page also claims we are secretive with our ingredients. We, as a brand, pride ourselves on being 100 percent transparent and list all our ingredients on pack and on our website. This is misleading information and we’ve contacted Consumer NZ to correct their outlandish comments immediately and will consider taking legal action.”

Lee explained that this isn’t the first time Consumer NZ has landed in hot water with its claims. Banana Boat sunscreen's SPF factor came into question in the past and the brand negated those claims and questioned their testing processes. They also went after Ajax, 30 Second Clean and Ecostore Multi-Purpose last year claiming their cleaners worked no better than water.

“A lack of consistency is also shown again in the laundry category, with our plastic free unlaminated cardboard packaging being rated as ‘Acceptable’ for Packaging & Environmental friendliness. In contrast, a Plastic container is rated as ‘Good’. We've also been rated ‘Poor’ on Safety which has not been explained and makes no sense,” continued Lee.

“Clearly, it’s a case of it being a new, innovative product, and testers have not followed the instructions on pack. For a regular load they should use two sheets. As they haven't published how they have tested, we do not know if they even put them in the drum or not (as instructed). It’s likely they placed them in the front-loading draw.

"We question the bias in their results and where their ‘donation’ fundings come from that could be skewing the brands they support. It is also not common practice and again shows Consumer NZ’s lack of respect for Kiwi businesses that they do not share their findings with the business that it impacts first to validate before they make them public.

“We have and continue to get fantastic reviews from actual customers who can see these sheets are cleaning their clothes effectively. We’re offering consumers a plastic free alternative for their washing, and we’ve been inundated with messages and support from our customer base saying how much they disagree with Consumer NZ’s findings.

“Two people have also already written on their product listing of re.stor their rebuttals. This has been a shining light in a time that has been very difficult for our small New Zealand business.”