James Hardie Appeals National Advertising Division Recommendation to Discontinue Certain Claims for its Fiber Cement Siding

New York, NY – October 24, 2024 – In a challenge brought by competitor Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Division determined that, in connection with certain testimonials for James Hardie Building Products, Inc.’s fiber cement siding, no additional disclosure of material connections is necessary, but recommended that other claims be modified or discontinued.   

The National Advertising Division (NAD) recommended that James Hardie:

• Discontinue claims that houses survived wildfires because of James Hardie siding.
• Discontinue or modify its advertising to avoid conveying the message that James Hardie siding by itself offers protection from wildfires.
• Discontinue its flammability comparison test and related claims that it conducted a valid comparison of the combustibility of home siding.
• Disclose its material connections with the firefighter endorser in its video demonstration.
• Discontinue its water block display and related claims about the difference between wood composite siding and fiber cement when immersed in water.

Further, NAD determined that:

• No disclosure of material connections is necessary in connection with James Hardie’s Firefighter & First Responder Rebate Program; and
• James Hardie’s website did not reasonably convey the messages that siding can protect from fires that start inside the house or that fires generally start outside the home such that the home siding significantly impacts whether the home and its contents will be damaged by fire.

Survival Claims

Louisiana-Pacific challenged claims made in two videos featuring survivors of wildfires that destroyed multiple homes, attributing the survival of their homes to James Hardie siding.

NAD determined that, in context, some consumers may reasonably take away the message that these homes survived solely due to Hardie siding. Moreover, even though the homeowners and others in the videos recount personal experiences with their houses, reasonable consumers may also take away the message that houses surviving a wildfire is a typical outcome when using Hardie siding.

NAD concluded these messages are not supported by the evidence in the record. Therefore, NAD recommended that James Hardie discontinue the challenged express and implied claims that houses survived wildfires due to James Hardie siding.

Demonstration

Louisiana-Pacific challenged a video product demonstration comparing fiber cement siding to competing products when exposed to flame, which appeared on YouTube and James Hardie’s website.

NAD concluded that the video demonstration reasonably conveys a message that Hardie siding can significantly reduce the risk of fire damage, by itself, against all types of external fires – a message that is not supported by the evidence.

Therefore, NAD recommended that James Hardie modify or discontinue the implied claims that:

• James Hardie fiber cement siding significantly reduces the risk of fire.
• James Hardie’s combustibility comparison test predicts the performance of various exterior sidings when exposed to fire.
• James Hardie constructed the combustibility comparison test to reflect real-world conditions in general

Further, NAD concluded that James Hardie failed to provide a reasonable basis for its claim of a valid comparison of home siding combustibility and recommended the claim and the demonstration be discontinued.

Endorsements

Louisiana-Pacific raised issues of the use of endorsements in one of the videos and the demonstration, contending that material connections were not disclosed and that other aspects of the endorsements were misleading.

Overall, NAD did not find additional disclosure of material connections necessary.  

However, NAD determined that three isolated examples of support from individuals are insufficient to support a broad claim of recognition “by fire departments nationwide” and recommended that James Hardie discontinue claims that its siding is recognized by fire departments nationwide.

Water Block Display

At trade shows, James Hardie displayed a clear plastic box with compartments containing Hardie siding and engineered wood and filled with water to demonstrate the difference between wood composite siding and fiber cement when immersed in water over a period of time. A sticker labeled “Wood Composite Siding” on the display states, “Absorbs water, more susceptible to swelling, buckling, and edge checking.”

NAD determined that professional builders may take away the message that the demonstration depicts how wood composite siding may react to water exposure for shorter periods.

NAD concluded the message is not supported by the evidence in the record and recommended James Hardie discontinue the water block display and the claim that wood composite siding “absorbs water” and is “more susceptible to swelling, buckling and edge checking” even when installed properly, and avoid conveying the message that properly installed wood composite siding will fall apart from exposure to water.

In its advertiser statement, James Hardie stated that it will appeal part of NAD’s decision because it disagrees with NAD’s recommendations that it discontinue use of the challenged video demonstration and the water block display. Further, James Hardie will appeal NAD’s findings that it did not provide adequate substantiation for:

• The claim that engineered wood siding absorbs water and is more susceptible to swelling, buckling and edge checking;
• The claim that noncombustible siding significantly reduces the risk of damage from fire;
• Claims regarding survival of homes due to James Hardie siding; and
• Claims that James Hardie’s combustibility demonstration was properly controlled, treated the products equally, and reflects appropriate conditions for comparing the combustibility of siding products when exposed to fire. 

Appeals of NAD decisions are made to the BBB National Programs’ National Advertising Review Board (NARB), the appellate-level truth-in-advertising body of BBB National Programs.

All BBB National Programs case decision summaries can be found in the case decision library. For the full text of NAD, NARB, and CARU decisions, subscribe to the online archive. This press release shall not be used for advertising or promotional purposes.

About BBB National Programs: BBB National Programs, a non-profit organization, is the home of U.S. independent industry self-regulation, currently operating more than a dozen globally recognized programs that have been helping enhance consumer trust in business for more than 50 years. These programs provide third-party accountability and dispute resolution services that address existing and emerging industry issues, create a fairer playing field for businesses, and a better experience for consumers. BBB National Programs continues to evolve its work and grow its impact by providing business guidance and fostering best practices in arenas such as advertising, child-and-teen-directed marketing, data privacy, dispute resolution, automobile warranty, technology, and emerging areas. To learn more, visit bbbprograms.org.

About the National Advertising Division: The National Advertising Division of BBB National Programs provides independent self-regulation and dispute resolution services, guiding the truthfulness of advertising across the U.S. The National Advertising Division reviews national advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising in all media and its decisions set consistent standards for advertising truth and accuracy, delivering meaningful protection to  consumers and leveling the playing field for business.