Current through Register Vol. 56, No. 18, September 16, 2024
(a) An
advertiser shall not use a fictitious former price. Use of a fictitious former
price will be deemed to be a violation of the Consumer Fraud Act.
(b) A former price or price range or the
amount of reduction shall be deemed fictitious if it can not be substantiated,
based upon proof:
1. Of a substantial number
of sales of the advertised merchandise, or comparable merchandise of like grade
or quality made within the advertiser's trade area in the regular course of
business at any time within the most recent 60 days during which the advertised
merchandise was available for sale prior to, or which were in fact made in the
first 60 days during which the advertised merchandise was available for sale
following the effective date of the advertisement;
2. That the advertised merchandise, or
comparable merchandise of like grade or quality, was actively and openly
offered for sale at that price within the advertiser's trade area in the
regular course of business during at least 28 days of the most recent 90 days
before or after the effective date of the advertisement; or
3. That the price does not exceed the
supplier's cost plus the usual and customary mark-up used by the advertising
merchant in the actual sale of the advertised merchandise or comparable
merchandise of like grade or quality in the recent regular course of
business.
(c) If the
former price specifically references a time in the remote past during which it
was offered, it shall be deemed fictitious unless substantiated pursuant to
either (b)1 or 3 above.
(d) The
following examples of fictitious pricing are provided for illustration only and
are not intended to limit the types of advertising the Division shall consider
to be fictitious:
1. John Doe is a retailer
of Brand X fountain pens which cost him $ 5.00 each. His usual markup is 50
percent over cost. That is, his regular retail price is $ 7.50. In order
subsequently to offer an unusual "bargain," Doe temporarily raises the price of
Brand X pens to $ 10.00 each. In so doing, Doe realizes that he will only be
able to sell a few pens, if any, at this inflated price. But he does not care,
because he intends to maintain that price for only a few days. Then he "cuts"
the artificially inflated price of $ 10.00 to the usual price--$ 7.50 at which
time he advertises: "Terrific Bargain: X Pens, Were $ 10, Now Only $ 7.50."
This is obviously a false claim. The advertised "bargain" is not
genuine.
2. Retailer Doe advertises
Brand X pens as having a "Retail Price $ 15.00, My Price $ 7.50," when, in
fact, only a few small suburban boutique-type stores in the area charge $
15.00. All of the larger outlets, like retailer Doe's, located in and around
the main shopping areas charge approximately $ 7.50. This advertisement would
be deceptive because the price charged by the small suburban boutique or
specialty stores would have no real significance to Doe's customers, to whom
the advertisement of "Retail Value $ 15.00" would suggest a prevailing, and not
merely an isolated and unrepresentative price in the area in which they
shop.
3. Retailer Doe advertises
Brand X pen as "Comparable Value $ 15.00" when only a small number of
unrepresentative specialty stores in the trade area offer Brand Y, an
essentially similar pen, for that price. This is a related form of misleading
advertising because the price of the comparable merchandise (that is, Brand Y),
which is cited for comparison is not representative of the price for Brand Y
being charged by representative retail outlets in the advertiser's trade
area.