© sdecoret – Fotolia.com

Misleading advertising through price information

OLG Dresden: Price information is misleading if additional costs are only accessible via a "hidden" link.

On 12.01.2016 (Ref.: 14 U 1425/15), the Higher Regional Court of Dresden ruled that telecommunications providers must include all costs incurred in their advertising. This also includes costs for additional services that are subject to a charge when the contract is concluded, even if these can be canceled after free trial months. An “asterisk” indicating the additional costs after the free trial months must be clearly and unmistakably recognizable to the customer.

Additional services automatically activated, but can be canceled free of charge

The telecommunications company PrimaCom had advertised in flyers and online with prices for complete packages in the area of telecommunications services. The stated monthly price was only shown for the basic tariff. However, the customer had to book additional services such as the “Security package” and “Family HD” when concluding the contract. The costs for the additional services are waived for the first two months. If the customer does not cancel the services on time, additional monthly costs of EUR 18.99 will be incurred. This information was only visible via a footnote and was not included in the advertised total price.

Deception of customers through improperly presented prices

Following the conclusion of the contract, many consumers complained that they had to pay more than advertised. Most customers had not noticed the additional services that were subject to a charge.

Following a number of complaints, the consumer advice center took action against PrimaCom’s advertising and complained of a breach of the Price Indication Ordinance (PAngV).

Misleading price information due to violation of the PAngV

As a result, the OLG Dresden ruled that PrimaCom’s advertising violated the PAngV. PrimaCom should have stated the total price for the advertised product, including the additional costs for the “security package” and “Family HD”. The offer “Test the first two months free of charge” does not change this. This is because the additional services had to be taken up when the contract was concluded. This meant that no additional costs were incurred only if the customer canceled the additional services in good time within the first two months.

Insufficient clarification of the footnote

The information required by the customer on the costs and termination options for the additional service was explained in more detail in a footnote. However, the footnote was linked in a non-transparent, inadmissible manner. At the end of the advertising page there was a link with “Price and tariff information”, but not a direct reference to the additional services marked with an asterisk. According to the Higher Regional Court of Dresden, this non-transparent link to further information on the chargeable additional services was inadmissible. The customer must be clearly and unambiguously informed about where to obtain further information on the necessary price details. But not via a hidden link at the end of the website.

Consumer protection

The PAngV and the European UGP Directive are intended to provide comprehensive protection for consumers in particular. In general, advertising may only take place if the consumer is fully informed about the total costs of the product or service. This should enable the customer to compare products from different providers and then make an autonomous market decision.

Contact person

Free newsletter

Matching contributions

Search

Request