City Farmers - is this misleading advertising instore?

vegemite2008 on 12/05/2017 - 17:49
Last edited 17/05/2017 - 13:09

Hi, I went to my local City Farmers Store (Perth) to buy some dog food.

They had several banners in the store which were promoting the fact that they will price match any Australian retailer.

I asked for a price match with Pet Circle, was $10 cheaper than City Farmers.

The person working said no, we only price match physical retailers, look the person said, we have a message on the notice board…

I clearly believe that they are in breach of the Australian Consumer Law, I sent HQ two emails and asked for a please explain but no response.

I did pay the asking price in the store (no dog food at home) but was hoping for HQ to reimburse me as they are clearly in breach of the ACL.

Comments in relation to the above is much appreciated.

Images from store uploaded to https://ibb.co/dOXugQ

Yes, I will also appreciate all the silly responses from the OB community as they make me laugh ha ha ha…

It is only about $10 but the matter is, Greencross that owns Cityfarmers are stock listed and I told them in the email that I will forward this to the ACCC unless they respond but they do not care.

General Discussion

Related Stores

City Farmers
City Farmers

Comments

  • Diji1 on 12/05/2017 - 18:01
    +3

    Yet another example of large Australian businesses breaking the law.

  • Savas on 12/05/2017 - 18:01
    +4

    Seems reasonable, pretty standard practice I think. Find it more surprising you've been here for 4 years but never bothered to vote on a deal.

    • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 18:32
      +3

      I'm just thinking of the poor person behind the counter that copped OPs self-entitled argument!

      • Savas on 12/05/2017 - 18:34

        True, anyone with any experience would know from Officeworks, Harvey Norman etc. that it never applies to online.

        • Flying Ace on 13/05/2017 - 09:45
          +1

          Officeworks applies to online.

  • altomic on 12/05/2017 - 18:06
    +3

    if that is the way they conduct business then I am never going to shop there.

    • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 18:12
      +7

      You weren't going to anyway were you…? 😂

      And where's the bikies?!

  • vegemite2008 on 12/05/2017 - 18:14
    +1

    "Find it more surprising you've been here for 4 years but never bothered to vote on a deal."

    Ha ha ha….

    I am waiting for that special deal ha ha ha….

    In relation to the law, I will contact the ACCC next week and submit the images.

    I don't like the fact that they are ripping people of every day just because many people don't complain.

    The interesting part of the ACL is that the onus of proof is on the retailer.

    With other words, Cityfarmers have to prove that I was not mislead. That will be hard with those images.

    Misleading or deceptive conduct. … Section 18 of the Australian Consumer Law (ACL), which is found in schedule 2 of the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (formerly the Trade Practices Act 1974) prohibits conduct by corporations in trade or commerce which is misleading or deceptive or is likely to mislead or deceive.

  • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 18:14
    +5

    Does your pet circle price include postage?

    And it's pretty normal for stores to only price match 'bricks & mortar' stores.

    I'm just amazed at the effort you've gone through for $10. You must value your spare time pretty low.

    • Flying Ace on 13/05/2017 - 09:46
      +1

      If you're not going to have any clearly visible terms and conditions to the policy you're advertising, don't advertise it. $10 isn't pocket change.

      Edit: Didn't see your post below with T&Cs.

  • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 18:16
    +15

    http://www.cityfarmers.com.au/price-match-policy/

    City Farmers will match any Australian competitor’s store or online price providing City Farmers Terms and Conditions are adhered to and that the competitor has physical stores within Australia.

    Took me 2 seconds to find, and I'm sure the store has those terms somewhere too, if you'd asked someone competent.

    So quit with the ACCC crap. That's my tax dollars paying for your lack of research.

    • nexus4 on 13/05/2017 - 12:15
      +1

      That's irrelevant - the issue is that the banners in store which advertise the price match policy are not appropriately qualified. The banner says nothing about there being any conditions, other than that the policy applies to Australian retailers only.

      Courts have held on numerous occasions that "Any purported corrective or qualifying information must be sufficiently clear and sufficiently prominent if it is to prevent an inaccurate primary message from being misleading or likely to mislead" (ACCC v TPG Internet Pty Ltd [2011] FCA 1254).

      There's no question in my mind that the in-store banner advertising the price match policy is in breach of s 18 of the ACL.

      • spackbace on 13/05/2017 - 12:36

        Which is just ludicrous that you need it to explicitly state "conditions apply" and you'd be happy.

        We're becoming such a nanny-state with no one taking any sort of responsibility. Everything has to be written out… We need caution signs for everything.

        • nexus4 on 13/05/2017 - 12:52

          Give me a break with the nanny state garbage. You're literally arguing that for profit businesses should be free to mislead consumers.

          We have consumer protection legislation in place for a reason.

        • spackbace on 13/05/2017 - 13:19

          @nexus4:

          So you'd be happy to have a disclaimer "conditions apply"?

          That would be fine for you?

        • nexus4 on 13/05/2017 - 13:33

          @Spackbace:

          Yes. The dominant message of the ad is that this business will price match any Australian retailer.

          In actual fact, the business will NOT price match any Australian retailer.

          Therefore, the dominant message needs to be appropriately qualified to avoid the possibility of consumers being mislead (which, as proven by the existence of this thread, is a very real possibility). This could be done by indicating that additional terms and conditions apply to this offer.

          That's not just my opinion, it's literally what the law says.

          If you don't like that I would encourage you to lobby for the repeal of the misleading conduct section of the ACL.

  • dizzle on 12/05/2017 - 18:18
    +3

    Most stores have terms and conditions that aren't listed on the main advertising and often it includes online retailers, same size and colour, item must be in stock, must be a local retailer, must be in an advertised catalogue etc.

    Honestly, I think that's fair enough. If you can get it from a similar store today (meaning I can cross the road and pay cash) then I would assume by that advertisement they would honour the price match. If you are buying it from an online only store, you will not get it today. It may be overseas stock, whether or not it is in warehoused in Australia (even if the site says it's an australian company). I would also think that it's reasonable for them to add delivery costs if they and then price match.

    Even if there is a bricks and mortar store there can be excusable exceptions. If Good Guys have their product on their EBAY site, I wouldn't expect JB or Myers to pricematch it (although it's nice when they do). Even more so if Ebay have their 20% off codes that come on here frequently.

    I prefer to purchase from the store that provides the original discount. If I can't wait for delivery or it's too far out of my way, I'll ask for the price match. If they say no, I'll decide whether I want to wait of pay the extra. $10 difference, means I don't have to wait or have someone home to accept a delivery (I don't like items left on the doorstep for security).

  • vegemite2008 on 12/05/2017 - 18:19
    -7

    "I'm just amazed at the effort you've gone through for $10. You must value your spare time pretty low."

    I don't like when corporations are dishonest.

    If it was the store around the corner, I would not care.

    But not when it comes to a company worth a 300 million dollars.

    If we all do our bit, then they will not get away with it.

    • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 18:21
      +1

      Underneath every comment is a 'reply' button just fyi…

    • dizzle on 12/05/2017 - 18:57

      I'm not sure there's anything to get away with. The sign said T&C apply. When you asked for the price match they told you what term disallowed the price match. I don't know whether you asked to see the T&Cs but if you did they are easy enough for them to find on their website to show you.

      You mentioned somewhere here that the burden of proof is on them. I think that is satisfied by the fact that you still purchased the goods at a higher price. Do you think any independent investigation is going to take your side if you say "I purchased it full price on the understanding that I would get money back". I would say if you didn't accept their policy then you would have purchased elsewhere

  • Baghern on 12/05/2017 - 18:19

    Pretty standard, the banks do this as well.

    Kogan is a Australian retailer that deals in the grey market, goodluck getting Officeworks to pricebeat them

  • vegemite2008 on 12/05/2017 - 18:20
    -1

    City Farmers will match any Australian competitor’s store or online price providing City Farmers Terms and Conditions are adhered to and that the competitor has physical stores within Australia.

    Mr Smart, then they would have to include on the banner the text TERMS AND CONDITIONS APPLY.

    • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 18:22

      So if they did that, you'd quit your unnecessary tirade?

      I mean, you're basing everything off a banner… It's actually kinda funny :)

      Thanks for the laughs on my Friday arvo

      • vegemite2008 on 12/05/2017 - 18:26
        -2

        "So if they did that, you'd quit your unnecessary tirade?"

        Of course, I accept that stores have terms and conditions.

        But, the ACL is there to protect us consumers. The ACL replaced the TPA many years ago, which did not protect consumers 100% even though it was pretty good.

        But if everyone has the same attitude like you, we would not need any Australian consumer law because everyone would just accept whatever the big retailers conduct would be.

        I will not respond to any more replies.

        Thanks for making me laugh though ha ha ha

        • spackbace on 12/05/2017 - 18:30
          +2

          I'm surprised you still bought from there without signs saying you had to pay, or pay in AUD anyway.

          Seems everything needs to be in black and white these days for situations like this, where people can't just use common-sense.

          Hell, it would've been quicker to google those price match terms than to look up the ACCC details!

          Ah such an awesome society we live in. I pity the person behind the counter that had to listen to you rant about the price match. Now there's a person that needs a hug!

        • petry on 12/05/2017 - 18:38

          Glad to see you are ignoring the wind up merchants - this is ozbargain.

          Some city farmers stores are awful, some price match. Easiest thing to do is to look around for the one that performs as advertised -there are terms and condition though and just because they are all not on the banner doesn't mean anything. Some city framers don't price match anyone and head office ignores it.

    • chumlee on 12/05/2017 - 20:30
      +1

      Yes they should put an asterisk and then reference that asterisk at the bottom with something like "terms and conditions apply see website for full details".

      ACCC will probably send off an email to the retailer if they have time but they are under resourced and you are not providing them with a huge scalp here.

  • mskeggs on 12/05/2017 - 20:48
    +2

    I think price matching is fundamentally anti-competitive, so part of me wants to see them get in trouble, but I also hate people wasting other's time over minor quibbles.
    Torn.

    • ATD on 13/05/2017 - 10:56
      +1

      "price matching is fundamentally anti-competitive" - I agree with this part

    • Baysew on 13/05/2017 - 11:10
      +1

      " I also hate people wasting other's time over minor quibbles." - I agree with this part

  • subywagon on 12/05/2017 - 23:05
    +1

    Bikies /thread (Just for you Spackbace…)

  • goosegog on 13/05/2017 - 12:52

    Have come across this situation before with The Good Guys who stipulated they would only price match with " bricks & mortar" stores - not on line retailers. Lesson to be learnt, order your dog food in advance when you see it's getting low. We also order ours through Pet Circle as their prices are so much cheaper. Last order was made on Thurs. 4/5 - 2 x 20 kg. Black Hawk dog biscuit. It arrived on Mon. 8/5 & we're in Perth, which normally takes weeks to deliver to !
    Not rocket science - just realise that you will need some soon & order it.

  • vegemite2008 on 17/05/2017 - 13:12

    Update: I have received a full refund. City Farmers are looking into how they can change the wording on the banner.

    Lesson learned, if we all do out bit when corporations try to get away with misleading tactics, it will be a much better retail world.

    ACCC is there for you and me, to protect us.

    • phocus on 23/05/2017 - 13:02

      you are my hero

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join