ARTICLE
17 November 2025

"£6 Specs"? Don't Drip Your Pricing - ASA Calls Out Select Specs For Unclear Minimum Spend Thresholds And Hidden Delivery Fees

LS
Lewis Silkin

Contributor

We have two things at our core: people – both ours and yours - and a focus on creativity, technology and innovation. Whether you are a fast growth start up or a large multinational business, we help you realise the potential in your people and navigate your strategic HR and legal issues, both nationally and internationally. Our award-winning employment team is one of the largest in the UK, with dedicated specialists in all areas of employment law and a track record of leading precedent setting cases on issues of the day. The team’s breadth of expertise is unrivalled and includes HR consultants as well as experts across specialisms including employment, immigration, data, tax and reward, health and safety, reputation management, dispute resolution, corporate and workplace environment.
In June, Select Specs (an eyewear retailer) ran a TV ad and a YouTube ad promoting bargain prices and bold savings for its prescription glasses.
United Kingdom Media, Telecoms, IT, Entertainment
Alex Meloy’s articles from Lewis Silkin are most popular:
  • within Media, Telecoms, IT and Entertainment topic(s)
  • in United States
Lewis Silkin are most popular:
  • within Cannabis & Hemp, Law Practice Management and Privacy topic(s)

In June, Select Specs (an eyewear retailer) ran a TV ad and a YouTube ad promoting bargain prices and bold savings for its prescription glasses.

The ads promoted Select Specs' "10 for the price of 1" offer on prescription glasses. It also advertised £6 glasses (priced to include frames, prescription lenses, and an anti‑scratch coating), emphasising that the offer was not available on the high street. In small print, the following information also appeared: "Minimum order £12. Free delivery on orders over £49."

Specsavers Optical Group Ltd (the brand behind the well-known "Should've gone to Specsavers" ads) lodged a complaint with the Advertising Standards Authority ("ASA"), challenging two claims made in the ads:

  1. the price comparison with high street glasses, specifically the claim "10 pairs of prescription glasses [...] for the price of 1 pair from the high street"; and
  2. the price representations "Select Specs £6 specs" and "all from just £6 a pair".

The ASA found both claims to be misleading, but the key takeaway from this ruling really concerns the £6 offer. It highlights that the new drip pricing rules under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 ("DMCCA") are now in effect and being actively enforced by regulatory bodies.

What is drip pricing?

Drip pricing occurs when a business advertises a product or service at an initial price but then adds unavoidable fees or charges later in the purchase process, so the total cost only becomes clear near the end of the customer journey.

Imagine booking a "£50" concert ticket. At checkout, you discover a £7 "processing fee," a £5 "venue surcharge," and a £3 "electronic delivery fee." Your £50 ticket has quietly become £65 – this is classic drip pricing.

Businesses are now prohibited from using drip pricing under the DMCCA. They must display the full "total price" upfront (including all fixed mandatory charges) and make any variable costs easy to estimate before you hit "buy."

Enforcing the new rules on drip pricing is a priority for the Competition and Markets Authority ("CMA"). Under the DMCCA, the CMA can determine whether consumer protection law has been breached without taking a business to court and may impose fines of up to 10% of a company's global annual turnover for non‑compliance. The CMA has consulted on draft drip pricing guidance which, among other things, deals with delivery charges, and we are waiting for the final version.

But even before the CMA starts enforcing in earnest, it is clearly on the ASA's radar as well.

What were the ASA's conclusions?

The ASA found that the £6 offer was not as it appeared.

Although the company did sell glasses priced at £6, customers had to meet a £12 minimum order threshold, and free delivery only applied to orders over £49. While those caveats were shown in small on-screen text, the ASA considered it insufficiently prominent to counter the overall impression that consumers could simply buy glasses for £6. In fact, a £5.95 delivery fee applied to orders under £49 and this wasn't mentioned at all in the ad.

The ASA found that it was not actually possible to purchase a pair of glasses for £6 and therefore concluded that the offer was misleading.

Select Specs were warned to ensure their pricing claims are not misleading, including by making minimum order requirements and non-optional delivery charges clear and prominent in future advertising.

What's the lesson for businesses?

The takeaway is simple: consumers should see the real cost upfront – there should be no surprises and no "add-ons" masquerading as options.

  1. Calculate and display the "total price" of the product. That means every mandatory amount a customer must pay to purchase, receive or use the product must be included in the headline price. A charge is only mandatory if it's truly unavoidable. If the customer can genuinely opt out, it doesn't belong in the total price. But if the consumer cannot complete the transaction without paying them (e.g. administration fees, booking fees, platform fees, delivery fees and service charges), they are part of the total price.
  2. Make pricing clear and prominent from the start. All pricing information must be provided upfront, in a place and format that the consumer will likely see. Don't hide key information in the footnotes or in the small print.

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.

See More Popular Content From

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