The Competition and Markets Authority has opened enforcement investigations into eight businesses over suspected breaches of consumer protection law involving online pricing practices.
Those cases cover a range of sectors, including firms such as StubHub, Viagogo, AA Driving School, BSM Driving School, Gold’s Gym, Wayfair, Appliances Direct, and Marks Electrical, reflecting how widely pricing rules can apply across the UK economy.
The investigations activate the strongest consumer enforcement powers the UK has under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA), shifting attention to what the law requires when prices, fees, or optional services are presented online.
What the Charges Mean Under the DMCCA
The DMCCA created a new enforcement model that allows the CMA to determine suspected breaches itself.
The authority no longer needs to begin with court action, which shortens the path between identifying problematic conduct and taking regulatory steps.
This matters in areas like drip pricing and default opt-ins because these practices often rely on design choices within websites and apps—choices that can fall within the definition of unfair commercial practices if they distort a consumer’s ability to make an informed decision.
Three legal elements typically come into play:
● Direct Decision-Making Power
If the CMA reaches a finding of infringement, it may impose directions, require redress for affected consumers, or issue financial penalties of up to 10% of global turnover.
● Duty to Present Prices Clearly
Unavoidable fees must appear upfront. A mandatory charge introduced late in the process can form the basis of a suspected breach if it changes the overall price in a way the consumer could not reasonably foresee.
● Prohibition of Misleading Sales Tactics
The DMCCA expands the list of practices that may be treated as misleading, including certain time-limited offers that do not reflect a verifiable deadline or that otherwise distort consumer choice.
These investigations focus on whether the pricing architecture and sales pathways meet those legal tests—not whether specific transactions were fair or unfair.
How the CMA’s Enforcement Process Works
The enforcement framework under the DMCCA follows a clearer sequence than earlier consumer regimes, but each stage still depends on the evidence available.
Evidence Collection
The CMA can require documents, internal data, design specifications, and online sales analytics.
Non-compliance with information requests can itself attract statutory penalties, which encourages early cooperation.
Provisional Infringement Notice (PIN)
If the CMA forms a provisional view that the law may have been breached, it issues a PIN explaining the conduct under review and the provisions potentially engaged.
Businesses can then respond with explanations, evidence, or proposed undertakings. This stage is central to ensuring procedural fairness.
Decision and Remedies
After reviewing all material, the CMA may issue a final infringement decision or choose to close the case.
If an infringement is found, possible remedies include changes to the pricing system, consumer redress requirements, or monetary penalties.
Appeals are made to the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
Each case’s timing varies because there is no statutory deadline, allowing the regulator to conduct a full assessment.
What UK Consumer Law Requires From Online Pricing Systems
Upfront Pricing
Under both long-standing consumer legislation and the DMCCA, mandatory fees must appear clearly at the point a consumer first sees a price.
A price that excludes compulsory charges can be treated as misleading if it prevents a consumer from understanding the true cost at the outset.
Fair Use of Time-Limited Offers
A countdown timer or “flash sale” must reflect an actual, verifiable deadline.
If the deadline regularly resets or does not correspond to a genuine end date, it may constitute misleading commercial practice.
Active Consent for Optional Services
Optional extras cannot be pre-selected.
The Consumer Contracts Regulations require that any additional payment be the result of active choice—meaning a consumer must positively opt in.
These rules apply regardless of sector, and they form the legal framework within which the CMA will assess the conduct under investigation.
Common Misconceptions About Investigations Like This
An investigation is not a finding of wrongdoing.
When the CMA opens a case, it is signalling that there are reasonable grounds to look more closely at certain practices—not that any breach has been established. The process is designed to gather evidence, test explanations, and determine whether further action is warranted.
Penalties do not require an initial court case.
A common misunderstanding is that the CMA must secure a court ruling before imposing sanctions. Under the DMCCA, the regulator can reach a decision and issue penalties administratively, with businesses retaining the right to challenge the outcome before the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
The size of the fee is not what matters legally.
Consumer protection rules focus on transparency and the consumer’s ability to understand the total price upfront. Even a relatively small mandatory charge added late in the process can raise concerns if it changes the overall cost in a way the average consumer would not reasonably anticipate.
Technical errors do not automatically remove liability.
Whether a confusing or incomplete price display resulted from a design flaw, software issue, or human oversight, the legal test remains the same: did the presentation materially distort the consumer’s decision-making? The law is concerned with the practical effect on shoppers, not the internal cause.
How Penalties Are Assessed in Consumer Protection Cases
A penalty under the DMCCA is guided by statutory limits and established regulatory principles. While the maximum is set at 10% of global turnover, the final figure depends on factors such as:
-
scale and duration of the suspected breach
-
number of consumers potentially affected
-
economic benefit gained
-
need for deterrence across the wider market
-
degree of cooperation during the investigation
This structured approach ensures decisions remain proportionate and capable of withstanding appeal scrutiny.
The Next Steps in the CMA’s Enforcement Process
The early steps will likely involve information requests and evidence analysis, followed—if concerns persist—by provisional notices outlining the CMA’s reasoning.
Businesses will then have the opportunity to respond before any final decision is reached.
The outcomes of these first DMCCA cases will influence how online pricing systems are designed across sectors and will help shape the long-term expectations for transparency and consumer protection in digital markets.
CMA DMCCA Investigations: Key Legal Questions Answered
Does the DMCCA completely outlaw countdown timers?
No. They are permitted if they correspond to a genuine, verifiable deadline and do not mislead consumers.
Can the CMA require companies to provide redress?
Yes. The DMCCA gives the regulator power to order consumer redress where appropriate.
Do businesses have rights during the process?
Businesses can respond to provisional notices, provide evidence, and appeal final decisions to the Competition Appeal Tribunal.
Is displaying mandatory fees in the small print enough to comply?
Not necessarily. Mandatory charges must be included upfront in the first price shown if they are unavoidable.
