The UK’s competition authority is pursuing legal action against Emma, a prominent mattress retailer, for allegedly misleading customers with its online discount practices.
- Two years ago, an investigation commenced into Emma’s use of urgency tactics, such as countdown timers, in online sales promotions.
- Emma was instructed to modify its reference pricing strategies, intended to show higher former prices, yet failed to fully comply.
- The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) filed for an enforcement order, escalating the matter to the High Court on October 17.
- CMA’s interim executive director expressed concerns over pressure tactics that could lead consumers to spend more than planned.
The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA), the UK’s competition watchdog, has initiated legal proceedings against Emma, a leading mattress provider. The action arises from concerns over the retailer’s online discounting strategies, which the CMA says could mislead consumers.
Two years prior, the CMA began investigating Emma’s use of online urgency claims. These claims often manifested as countdown timers that retailers use to instigate a sense of urgency, encouraging quick consumer decisions to purchase before deals expire. This practice can manipulate perceived scarcity and prompt hasty buying decisions.
Despite the CMA’s requests, Emma did not adequately adjust its ‘reference pricing’ approach. This pricing strategy is often employed by retailers to imply that goods were previously sold at a higher price than currently offered, potentially misleading shoppers about the value they’re receiving.
On October 17, the CMA sought an enforcement order through the High Court, highlighting Emma’s insufficient response to its demands for change in selling practices. This legal move underscores the authority’s commitment to ensuring fair trading practices online.
CMA interim executive director George Lusty expressed significant concern over sales tactics like discounts and countdown clocks when used misleadingly. He indicated that such methods could unduly influence consumers into making purchases more hastily than they might otherwise, driven by a fear of missing out.
The CMA’s legal action against Emma reflects its ongoing commitment to consumer protection in the retail sector.
