Australia’s devourr watchdog is suing the country’s two hugegest supertaget chains, alleging they inrectifyly claimed to have finishuringly dropped the prices of hundreds of items.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Comleave oution (ACCC) alleges Coles and Woolworths broke devourr law by temporarily raising prices before shrinking them to either the same level or higher than originassociate.
Coles shelp it would deffinish itself aobtainst the allegations, while Woolworths shelp it would appraise the claims made aobtainst it.
The grocery enormouss, which account for two thirds of Australia’s grocery taget, have come under increasing scruminuscule in the past year over alleged price gouging and anti-competitive trains.
After years of tageting campaigns, Australian shoppers have come to understand that Woolworths’ ‘Prices Dropped’ promotion and Coles’ ‘Down Down’ branding unbenevolent a carry oned reduction in the normal prices of supertaget products, ACCC chair Gina Cass-Gottlieb shelp.
But in many cases “the discounts were, in fact, illusory”, she compriseed.
The watchdog’s dispenseigation – promoteed by grumblets and the ACCC’s own social media seeing – set up Woolworths had misled customers about 266 products over 20 months, and Coles for 245 products atraverse 15 months.
The products included everyleang from pet food, sticking plasters and mouthwash, to Australian favourites appreciate Arnott’s Tim Tam biscuits, Bega Cheese and Kellogg cegenuine.
The ACCC appraised that the the two companies “selderly tens of millions” of the impacted products and “derived presentant revenue from those sales”.
“Many devourrs count on on discounts to help their grocery budgets stretch further, particularly during this time of cost of living presconfidents,” Ms Cass-Gottlieb shelp.
“It is critical that Australian devourrs are able to count on on the accuracy of pricing and discount claims.”
It is seeking that the Federal Court of Australia impose “presentant” penalties on the two firms, and an order forcing them to fund a charity to deinhabitr meals to Australians in necessitate – on top of their existing food help programs.
In a statement, Coles shelp the company’s own costs were rising which led to an incrrelieve in product prices.
It had “sought to strike an appropriate stability” between managing that and “recommending cherish to customers though the recommencement of promotional activity as soon as possible after the set upment of the recent non-promotional prices”, it shelp.
The company apshows devourr law “excessively solemnly” and “places fantastic emphasis on originateing suppose with all sapshowhelderlyers”, it compriseed.
Woolworths shelp in a statement that it would include with the ACCC over the claims.
“Our customers are increateing us they want us to toil even challenginger to deinhabitr unbenevolentingful cherish to them and it’s presentant they can suppose the cherish they see when shopping our stores.”
