Contractual terms are distinguished from mere representations, not intended to be promises. In other words, no liability can arise if statement was made without any intention to form any kind of contractual relationship.
In his famous expression about peas versus beans in Chanter v Hopkins (1838) 4 M & W 399, Lord Abinger CB considered "unfortunate use made of the word warranty" at 404:
A good deal of confusion has arisen in many of the cases on this subject, from the unfortunate use made of the word "warranty." A warranty is an express or implied statement of something which the party undertakes shall be part of a contract; and though part of the contract, yet collateral to the express object of it. But in many of the cases, some of which have been referred to, the circumstance of a party selling a particular thing by its proper description, has been called a warranty; and the breach of such contract, a breach of warranty; but it would be better to distinguish such cases as a non-compliance with a contract which a party has engaged to fulfil; as, if a man offers to buy peas of another, and he sends him beans, he does not perform his contract; but that is not a warranty; there is no warranty that he should sell him peas; the contract is to sell peas, and if he sends him any thing else in their stead, it is a non-performance of it.