When consumers look for the best deal, they often rely on price comparisons. If a retailer claims their television is $100 cheaper than a specific competitor’s, or an auto shop advertises that their oil change is half the price of the shop down the street, those comparisons strongly influence buying decisions. However, prices in the market change constantly. The Utah Truth in Advertising Act protects consumers from being manipulated by outdated and inaccurate pricing data.
What is the Utah Truth in Advertising Act?
The Utah Truth in Advertising Act, found in Utah Code Title 13, Chapter 11a, is designed to prevent deceptive, misleading, and false advertising practices within the state. Its primary goal is to ensure that businesses compete fairly and that consumers receive accurate information about the goods and services they purchase.
Under this law, a practice is considered deceptive if a business passes off goods as something they are not, creates confusion about a product’s source, or manipulates pricing data to make their own offers appear artificially superior.
The Rule on Stale Price Comparisons
Specifically, Utah Code § 13-11a-3(1)(m) addresses how old a price comparison can be before it becomes misleading. The law states that a deceptive trade practice occurs when a person or business:
“without clearly and conspicuously disclosing the date of the price assessment makes a price comparison with the goods of another based upon a price assessment performed more than seven days prior to the date of the advertisement or uses in an advertisement the results of a price assessment performed more than seven days prior to the date of the advertisement without disclosing, in a print ad, the date of the price assessment, or in a radio or television ad, the time frame of the price assessment;”
In simple terms, a business cannot legally use a competitor’s price from weeks or months ago to make their own current price look like a great deal, unless they clearly tell the consumer exactly when they checked that competitor’s price. If the price check is more than seven days old, the date (or timeframe for broadcast ads) must be conspicuously disclosed.
Why Up-to-Date Price Comparisons Matter
Truthful and current price comparisons are the foundation of a fair and transparent market. When a business uses stale pricing data, it harms the consumer and disrupts the local economy.
- Accurate Market Valuation: Prices fluctuate based on sales, supply chain issues, and seasonal demand. Consumers use comparison pricing to determine what a fair market rate actually is today, not what it was last month.
- Time and Effort: Shoppers trust advertised comparisons to save them the time of checking multiple stores themselves. Stale comparisons exploit that trust, causing consumers to overpay under the false belief that the competitor’s price is still higher.
- Fair Competition: When a company knowingly uses an old, higher price from a rival to make their own offer look better, it steals business from honest competitors who may have already lowered their prices to match the current market.
Examples of Deceptive Stale Pricing
A violation of these rules regarding stale price comparisons can take several forms:
- Outdated Grocery Match-ups: A supermarket distributes a printed flyer claiming their produce is 20% cheaper than a rival chain. The claim is based on a price check conducted a month ago, but the flyer does not disclose the date of the assessment, ignoring the fact that the rival chain has since lowered its prices.
- The Lingering Billboard: A tire shop erects a billboard comparing its installation fees to a competitor’s rates. The tire shop left an outdated price-comparison billboard up for six months after the competitor lowered their rates.
- Radio Ad Timeframes: A local dealership runs a radio advertisement claiming they beat another specific dealer’s truck prices. The comparison is based on an assessment done 10 days prior, but the radio ad fails to mention the timeframe of when those prices were actually checked.
Enforcement and Consequences
The Utah Truth in Advertising Act provides mechanisms to address violations. If a court finds that a person or business is violating any provisions of this Chapter, the consequences can include:
- Injunctions: A court can order the business to stop the deceptive advertising practice immediately.
- Financial Damages: The court may award actual damages sustained from the deception or $2,000, whichever is greater.
- Record Keeping: Businesses that make price comparisons with competitors are required by law to maintain the factual records of those price assessments for one year to prove their claims were valid when made.
The focus of the law is on transparency. If a business wants to boast about beating a competitor’s price, they must be honest about exactly when that price was accurate.
Need Legal Assistance in Utah?
Head Law can help if you have consumer protection questions or face deceptive trade practices. Managing attorney David S. Head and his team assist clients in protecting their rights under Utah consumer laws. Contact Head Law at (801) 691-7511 to schedule a consultation.