Unethical pricing @waitrose.com

baser999

I can’t help but think I’ve just wasted a few minutes reading this thread, trying to see where it was leading 🤔 But no . . . . .

thriftytracey

Just buy a bar of your favourite chocolate - much cheaper.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Pollycat said:

But is it 'dodgy tactics'?
But is it 'unethical pricing'?

Well if it breaches consumer protection legislation I think most would say that's "unethical" or "dodgy" in the same sense they would with any other activity that breaches legislation, but again morals are subjective, the correct question is whether it's lawfully classed as misleading but I doubt many people are going to post here and ask if what they've seen in a shop complies with the CPRs  

Pollycat

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Pollycat said:

But is it 'dodgy tactics'?
But is it 'unethical pricing'?

Well if it breaches consumer protection legislation I think most would say that's "unethical" or "dodgy" in the same sense they would with any other activity that breaches legislation, but again morals are subjective, the correct question is whether it's lawfully classed as misleading but I doubt many people are going to post here and ask if what they've seen in a shop complies with the CPRs  

So does it breach consumer protection legislation?

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Pollycat said:

So does it breach consumer protection legislation?

The CPRs are designed to be broad rather than specific, this gives the advantage of covering a wide range of practices, as well as future proofing the legislation, but has the downside of leaving the specifics to be decide over time by the courts. 

I can only offer an opinion that it is, I can't see any reason to mix £11 and £15 items together in a display and only have signs for £11 other than hoping customers would unsuspectingly buy the £15 and not notice or not bother to complain. 

I would assume a large company would claim this sort of thing is a mistake so unless there is a pattern of behaviour they would have a defence against committing an offence. 

Sadly the likes of Trading Standards are under funded and over stretched so whilst we have very strong consumer protection laws it is often left to the individual to enforce their rights and I assume most of the time they don't bother. 

Occasionally the CMA will look into wide spread practices or some well known places might such as the recent example from Which:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/09/which-reports-tesco-to-cma-over-pricing-of-clubcard-offers

Tesco changed their pricing display, presumably because they didn't want to risk being found guilty of breaching the CPRs, and it's a good example of something that was deemed acceptable being questioned and effecting change. 

Pollycat

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head said:

Pollycat said:

So does it breach consumer protection legislation?

The CPRs are designed to be broad rather than specific, this gives the advantage of covering a wide range of practices, as well as future proofing the legislation, but has the downside of leaving the specifics to be decide over time by the courts. 

I can only offer an opinion that it is, I can't see any reason to mix £11 and £15 items together in a display and only have signs for £11 other than hoping customers would unsuspectingly buy the £15 and not notice or not bother to complain. 

I would assume a large company would claim this sort of thing is a mistake so unless there is a pattern of behaviour they would have a defence against committing an offence. 

Sadly the likes of Trading Standards are under funded and over stretched so whilst we have very strong consumer protection laws it is often left to the individual to enforce their rights and I assume most of the time they don't bother. 

Occasionally the CMA will look into wide spread practices or some well known places might such as the recent example from Which:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/jun/09/which-reports-tesco-to-cma-over-pricing-of-clubcard-offers

Tesco changed their pricing display, presumably because they didn't want to risk being found guilty of breaching the CPRs, and it's a good example of something that was deemed acceptable being questioned and effecting change. 

I'm amazed that anyone would think this is anything other than a mistake.

The link you provided was a company-wide policy and is nothing like what the OP reported.
I agree with Which? that not to provide unit pricing on clubcard offers was wrong.

I really do doubt that every Tesco in the UK have £11 and £15 Easter eggs mixed up.

I think this is a case of us agreeing to disagree.

the_lunatic_is_in_my_head

Pollycat said:

I'm amazed that anyone would think this is anything other than a mistake.

The link you provided was a company-wide policy and is nothing like what the OP reported.
I agree with Which? that not to provide unit pricing on clubcard offers was wrong.

I really do doubt that every Tesco in the UK have £11 and £15 Easter eggs mixed up.

I think this is a case of us agreeing to disagree.

It is likely a mistake, a mistake is only defence against committing an offence, regardless of being a mistake or not it would still be a breach of the CPRs  

The link is just an example of of how certain activity occurs until questioned because the regs are not specific which ties into the question you asked which can only be answered generally. 

eddddy

It's probably a mistake by a sloppy employee, but it's a breach of CPRs - so if you feel strongly enough, you could report it to Trading Standards via Citizen's Advice.

Trading Standards are unlikely to do anything in response to one complaint, but if they see a pattern of complaints against one shop/chain - they might send out an inspector to make some test purchases, etc.

If they find problems with their test purchases, they might give advice or warnings, in the first instance.


The shop isn't required by law to sell you the product at the price displayed - but most supermarkets will do so anyway. I suspect one reason they do that is to keep you happy and less likely to report them to Trading Standards.

Okell

Hmmm.

One of the problems I have with Waitrose (which is where we do most of our shopping because it's nearer than Sainsburys) is that I think their price per unit signage is often confusing and potentially misleading.  Whether it's deliberate or not I don't know.

What I mean is where they have a range of similar and comparable products but where different brands and quantities have their "per unit" prices expressed differently.  eg "£n per kg" for one brand or quantity, but then "nnn pence per 100g" for a different brand or quantity.

You might well say that all you need to do is multiply the "per 100g" price by 10 to get a comparison, but when I pointed out an example of this unit pricing discrepancy to my wife, she was actually confused - and I suspect she wouldn't be alone.

I really can't see any valid justification for not expressing unit prices consistently within a range of similar or comparable products.  There's no justification for swapping arbitrarily between g and kg.

For example, if you look at this page you'll find several instances of this.  Why show Waitrose Mixed Nuts at £15 per kg (for 400 g) but Waitrose Raisin and nut mix at 80p per !00g (for 510g)?  And cashew nuts at £1.44 per 100g ( for 400g) but walnuts at £14.88 per kg (also for £400 g)?

Nuts - Search | Waitrose & Partners

Yes, I know you only need to move the decimal point one place to the left or right, but why should you need to do that at all?  Why can't they be consistent in the first place?

I can't help feeling it might be done with the intention of confusing the customer.  Otherwise why do it?

(I did point this out to Waitrose on a customer survey some years ago but they're obviously still doing it)

[to be continued...]

Okell

[rant continued...]

The other thing that annoys me about Waitrose's unit pricing is where they have special offers.

They'll show the usual purchase price in black typeface and the reduced or special offer price in red typeface.  But the only "per unit" price they show is in black.  

So is that "per unit" price in black referring to the original purchase price (also in black) or to the reduced purchase price - which is in red?

I've even asked staff in Waitrose and they don't seem to be sure themselves.

It's really infuriating if you want to compare the unit price of items on offer against the unit price of those at the usual purchase price.  I'm probably above averagely numerate but I can't be bothered working it out in my head and I suspect most other people can't either.  

Why can't they just show the usual purchase price and usual per unit price in black, and then the reduced/offer purchase price and reduced/offer per unit price in red?

Then everybody knows what's what without having to perform mental arithmetic gymnastics.