No menu items!
HomeOCEANIANEW ZEALANDCOMMERCE COMMISSION FILES CHARGES AGAINST WOOLWORTHS OVER MISLEADING PRICING PRACTICES

COMMERCE COMMISSION FILES CHARGES AGAINST WOOLWORTHS OVER MISLEADING PRICING PRACTICES

Published on

spot_img

On 10 December, the Commerce Commission (NZCC), New Zealand’s competition, consumer, and economic regulation agency, announced its intention to bring charges against Woolworths’ local branch for misleading shoppers on promotional prices and specials.

NZCC is expected to assert that the alleged inaccurate pricing and misleading promotions could constitute violations of the country’s Fair Trading Act.

According to NZCC Deputy Chair Anne Callinan, supermarkets have long been on notice about the importance of accurate and clear pricing. The NZCC is not satisfied with the continuing issues they are seeing across the industry.

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) initiated legal proceedings against Coles and Woolworths in September of this year, citing consumer law violations. The ACCC contends that these retailers raised prices temporarily for brief intervals prior to advertising them as part of their “Prices Dropped” and “Down Down” promotions.

In Australia, the dubious pricing strategies have already led to class action lawsuits that may result in financial compensation for Australian consumers. The law firms Carter Capner Law (CCL) and Gerard Malouf & Partners (GMP) have commenced legal actions, with GMP asserting that the compensation could range from 200 to more than 1,300 Australian dollars.

The possible compensation resulting from CCL’s lawsuit could be considerably higher. Preliminary assessments indicate that households might be eligible to claim between 2,000 and 5,000 dollars, contingent upon their expenditure and the extent of the misleading pricing practices. A representative for CCL said that 18,000 people had signed up just days after the class action launched.

The ACCC claimed that Woolworths provided misleading information to customers regarding the pricing of 266 products at various intervals over a span of 20 months, whereas Coles was implicated in misleading customers about 245 products over a period of 15 months. The regulatory body estimated that the supermarkets sold tens of millions of the impacted products, resulting in substantial revenue from these transactions.

author avatar
CAI-STAFF

Latest articles

DUTCH FOUNDATION RULED INADMISSIBLE IN WAMCA CASE AGAINST STELLANTIS

The FCIRS Foundation has lodged claims against Stellantis under the WAMCA, claiming that Stellantis'...

Booking.com Faces Consumer Claim in The Netherlands

The Dutch Consumers’ Association (Consumentenbond) and the Consumers Competition Claims Foundation (CCC) have initiated...

HOTELS FILE COLLECTIVE ACTION IN THE NETHERLANDS AGAINST BOOKING.COM

Hotels throughout Europe are being urged to participate in a class action against Booking.com...

ECONOMIC STUDY SUGGESTS COLLECTIVE ACTIONS MAY COST THE UK ECONOMY 18 BILLION GBP

A recent economic study released today, titled The Impact of Increased Mass Litigation in...

More like this

DUTCH FOUNDATION RULED INADMISSIBLE IN WAMCA CASE AGAINST STELLANTIS

The FCIRS Foundation has lodged claims against Stellantis under the WAMCA, claiming that Stellantis'...

Booking.com Faces Consumer Claim in The Netherlands

The Dutch Consumers’ Association (Consumentenbond) and the Consumers Competition Claims Foundation (CCC) have initiated...

HOTELS FILE COLLECTIVE ACTION IN THE NETHERLANDS AGAINST BOOKING.COM

Hotels throughout Europe are being urged to participate in a class action against Booking.com...