ARTICLE
11 November 2019

Competition Bureau Proves Drip Pricing Is A Hot Button Topic

SB
Smart & Biggar

Contributor

Smart & Biggar uncovers and maximizes intellectual property and technology assets for our clients. Today’s fast-paced innovation economy demands a higher level of expertise and attention to detail when it comes to IP strategy and protection. With over 125 lawyers, patent agents and trademark agents collaborating across five Canadian offices, Smart & Biggar is trusted by the world’s leading innovators to find value in their IP rights. As market leaders in IP, Smart & Biggar’s team is on the pulse when it comes to the latest developments and the wider industry changes that impact our clients. To stay informed, visit smartbiggar.ca/insights, including access to our RxIP Update (smartbiggar.ca/insights/rx-ip-updates), a monthly digest of the latest decisions and law surrounding the life sciences and pharmaceutical industries.
The Competition Bureau demonstrated its commitment to enforcing against the practice of drip pricing or hidden fees with its October 28, 2019 announcement of its investigation into FlightHub Group Inc
Canada Antitrust/Competition Law

The Competition Bureau demonstrated its commitment to enforcing against the practice of drip pricing or hidden fees with its October 28, 2019 announcement of its investigation into FlightHub Group Inc. Specifically, the Bureau is investigating its representations for flight-related services such as seat selection and flight cancellation, which result in hidden fees. While the investigation is ongoing, the Bureau reached an agreement with FlightHub that prohibits it from using false or misleading representations on flighthub.com and justfly.com.

The announcement is on the heels of the July 2019 consent agreement reached between the Bureau and the Ticketmaster companies regarding its hidden fees for sporting and entertainment events. Under the consent agreement, Ticketmaster agreed to pay $4 million in penalties and $500k for the costs incurred by the Bureau. The Bureau’s investigations revealed advertised prices are deceptive because consumers pay mandatory fees that are added later in the purchasing process. This “drip pricing” resulted in consumers pay more than 20%, and in some cases 65%, above the advertised price.

The Ticketmaster case represented the fifth time since 2015 that the Bureau successfully took action against the advertising of unattainable prices online. (Other major case against car rental companies totally $9.95 million). 

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More