CMA’s cost-of-living focus continues with grocery stores review findings

Angelique Bret and Tadeusz Gielas of Pinsent Masons were commenting after the CMA’s review found examples of retailers displaying inaccurate pricing – and in some cases not displaying the price of goods available in-store at all.

In total, the CMA inspected price marking practices at 139 grocery stores in England and Wales. The stores it inspected included a mix of different types of supermarket chains, from large supermarkets and smaller convenience store versions of the supermarkets, including stores located on petrol station forecourts; symbol convenience stores, which are small independent retailers that operate under a symbol brand name;, variety stores, which are large retailers that sell general merchandise such as hardware, toys, furniture and seasonal goods alongside a selection of groceries; and independent food stores, which are independent supermarkets and larger grocery stores.

Similar reviews were undertaken by some regional and local Trading Standards agencies in parts of England and Wales, as well as by the Society of Chief Officers of Trading Standards in Scotland and Trading Standards Northern Ireland, respectively.

The purpose of the CMA’s review was to assess whether retailers were displaying clear and accurate price information in-store, and whether the indicated selling price matched the price charged at the till, as required under relevant consumer laws – namely, the Price Marking Order 2004 (PMO) and the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs).

The PMO requires traders to display the total selling price of goods, including the unit price, unless exempt, in a way that is unambiguous, easily identifiable, and clearly legible. This information must be available and given in proximity to the goods so that consumers do not have to seek it from the trader. The CPRs require that traders give customers the material information they need, such as the price of goods, to make an informed decision. A breach of the law is likely to have occurred if pricing information is missing, incorrect, or confusing such that it affects whether the consumer would or would not have bought the goods if they had known the correct price.

The CMA said it “identified a lack of compliance” by some retailers “in relation to the display of clear and accurate pricing information”. It highlighted particular concerns about practices at some symbol convenience stores and independent food stores.

“Compliance at the symbol convenience stores and the independent food stores ranged from very good at some stores, to very poor at others, where entire shelves or sections of the store failed to display selling prices for a wide range of goods,” the CMA said in its review findings report.

Better rates of compliance were identified at supermarkets and variety stores, it said.

“The supermarket inspections identified few concerns in relation to price marking,” the CMA said. “When checking prices at the till, again compliance was very good for the majority of the supermarkets, with no errors recorded at 57% of the stores we inspected, and a single error at 20% of the stores. Similarly, we identified few issues with the variety stores, with one retailer accounting for the majority of concerns in relation to both price accuracy and price marking practices.”

However, the CMA said its review findings suggest some retailers are “either not aware of their legal obligations or view compliance with the relevant consumer law as optional rather than mandatory”. It warned retailers that fail to comply with consumer law that they face potential enforcement action.

To help businesses, the CMA together with trading standards bodies have published a pricing accuracy poster that gives examples of compliant and non-compliant pricing practices.

Gielas said: “The CMA’s findings complement the CMA’s examination of grocery sector unit pricing and loyalty pricing under consumer protection laws, as well as its separate examination of competition in the grocery sector which led to the CMA launching its infant formula market study earlier this year. The CMA’s strong focus on the grocery sector is part of its broader work to help address cost of living pressures in line with the CMA’s annual plan 2024/25 and a recent speech by the CMA’s chief executive, Sarah Cardell.”

“The fast-moving consumer goods sector remains a priority area for the CMA to commit its resources. In addition to this type of market review, we can expect the CMA to take enforcement action against retailers where the CMA considers this is necessary in order to force a change to market practices. This sector is also being targeted by the CMA for enforcement action in relation to suspected greenwashing in breach of consumer law,” Bret added.

The Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Bill (DMCC Bill), which is now in the final stages of being approved by the UK parliament, will significantly strengthen the CMA’s consumer protection enforcement powers and align them with the authority’s existing enforcement powers under UK competition law. This includes the new ability for the CMA determine, without resorting to court proceedings, when consumer protection law is infringed and to fine businesses up to 10% of their global annual turnover for substantive breaches.

The CMA will also be able to impose significant turnover-based fines on companies for procedural breaches, such as refusing to cooperate with a CMA investigation or providing misleading information. Individuals may likewise face significant fines from the CMA for substantive or procedural consumer law breaches, under the new regime.