The court will determine the fine. The ACCC will suggest an amount.
“For Coles the damage is immense. There will be substantial fines, a class action for damages, reputational loss for the business.”
So…surely everyone who’s ever shopped in Coles (and Woolies) would/should be entirled to some sort of compensation, if you think about it. Not just those who were able to sign-up to the class action (yes, I am well aware of how class actions work, I’m in two where they are going through damages to be paid out).
I just don’t think they should get away with just a fine, and whatever the class action determines is suitable. Sure, repuational damage is one thing, but they hold the lions share of the grocey market in Australia. And still will after all is said and done.
2 Likes
I agree to a point - the public backlash and negative media coverage are probably more damaging to Colesworth than most fines are.
1 Like
True. But again, they have the lions share of the grocery market. In many cases, they are the only game in town. They could probably just cop the fines on the chin and move on.
I do think more needs to be done in the punishment - aside from the fines, damages to the paid out, reputational damage, etc.
1 Like
The fines should be huge. Not just “a days profit” worth of fines…
And they can’t pass it onto consumers through increased prices. A lot of people were saying that on 702 this afternoon.
3 Likes
Don’t be so sure on reputational damage.
Qantas has been taken to the cleaners how many times now? They are also a monopoly so life goes on.
This will all be a forgotten memory in no time. Coles and Woolworths both have had new Management teams installed since, so like Qantas, they will sail through without any real accountability. Banducci is long gone from Woolworths as is Joyce from QF.
Hopefully a message to commercial teams to stop all these bs price drop scams. I see it’s still the norm today.
Next big one that needs to watch out is Chemist Warehouse. They need to be very careful when they claim their “savings”.
EG store fronts that blast “up to 85% off” as a permanent saving. That needs to be substantiated with records showing genuine savings and the 85% off needs to be on a reasonable amount of products not just 1 or 2.
EG catalogue banners claiming “up to 50% off RRP”. Any reference to RRP is misleading these days as it references a wholesalers suggested sell price off a price list which is no indication of the market price.
You understand the concept of the words “up to”…right?
5 Likes
House/Robins Kitchen is another with shocking gimmicks.
‘Up to’ on the banners is in text so small one needs a magnifying glass.
They also run closing down for stocktake sales, ‘everything must go’ nonsense. Most of it is just house branded no name rubbish with high markup.
2 Likes
Not to mention EB Games/Zing - when are they not having a sale?
I do like them though…I am a level 4 and Plus member. 
Here is one of the House clearance scams. UP TO is buried in.
The same company apparently has a shady return policy that doesn’t always align with consumer laws. The reviews online are pretty scathing toward this outfit. I can’t imagine what it would be like working for them, probably hold staff hostage to sales targets.
There are more headaches for Coles tonight as lawyers line up to get refunds for millions of Aussie shoppers duped by the company's pricing practices. A giant class action is identifying customers who bought hundreds of affected products, with proof of purchase easier than you… pic.twitter.com/eNk9uxvHHT
— 7NEWS Queensland (@7NewsBrisbane) May 15, 2026
I zoomed in and see what you mean about the microscopic “up to”. That is absolutely misleading.
1 Like
So there’s some written off junk somewhere that’s 80% off and the rest is the same price as anywhere else, that disappointment is why I don’t bother with house. They shot themselves in the foot a long time ago as far as I’m concerned.
But this “Up To” retail trick is used everywhere these days in stores and online. If they crack down on House, then crack down on everyone.
i think the difference is that those examples you posted, the “Up To” is clearly visible and in one case the same font/print size as the percentage figure. In the shopfront example shown, the “up to” is so tiny it is not decipherable unless you’re right up close. There is probably nothing illegal in it, but it’s a dodgy practice.
1 Like
The problem with “up to” is also one of interpretation (and I’m reminded of a scene in The Thick of It that deals with this) - what is a reasonable expectation for someone seeing a sign that says “Up to X% off”? Is it that there are items that are discounted by that exact percentage? Should a single item priced with that discount that no one reasonably expects will sell be enough to use that percentage?
One of the world’s biggest peer-to-peer e-commerce platforms, eBay, is getting rid of seller fees from today but the new changes mean buyers can expect to pay more.
The overhaul will see casual vendors no longer have to hand over 13 per cent of their sale price to eBay when selling items online.
1 Like