Competition Bureau sues DoorDash, alleging misleading price promotions
The Competition Bureau is taking legal action against DoorDash Inc. DASH-Q and its Canadian subsidiary, alleging the company promotes their online delivery services at a lower price than what consumers actually have to pay.
The bureau said Monday that it had launched an investigation, finding that consumers could not purchase food and other items at the advertised price on DoorDash websites and apps owing to additional mandatory fees at checkout.
This practice is what the bureau refers to as drip pricing and 'is deceptive because consumers are not presented with an attainable price upfront,' it said in a news release.
The bureau alleges that certain fees presented on DoorDash platforms appear to be taxes, but are instead charges imposed at the company's discretion.
The bureau filed its application against DoorDash with the Competition Tribunal, calling for the company to pay a penalty, end deceptive price and discount advertising, stop portraying fees as taxes, and issue a restitution to affected consumers who purchased items through DoorDash's platform.
Trent Hodson, communications lead for DoorDash Canada, told The Globe and Mail in an e-mailed statement that transparency is a 'top priority' for the company and denied the allegations of misleading customers.
The bureau's statement notes that DoorDash charges consumers numerous mandatory fees to deliver orders made online, including service fees, delivery fees, expanded range fees, small order fees and regulatory response fees.
Opinion: Canada needs a wartime competition policy
DoorDash has engaged in the alleged conduct of drip pricing for close to a decade, acquiring nearly $1-billion in mandatory fees from customers, according to the bureau.
In one case, the bureau said, a customer in Quebec tried to order an item from a sushi shop through DoorDash that was originally advertised as $6.25, but could not purchase the item without paying the obligatory fees, including a $1.99 delivery fee and service fee ranging from $1.99 to $3.99. These charges appear to be in addition to tax fees.
Throughout the order process, these types of fees are often hidden or are not in close proximity to the initially stated prices. The bureau uses this example to establish their argument that DoorDash omits or hides obligatory fees from the price representation until checkout, rendering the advertised price of $6.25 unattainable.
'The Competition Bureau has been fighting against this misleading practice for years,' Commissioner Matthew Boswell said in the release. 'Our litigation against DoorDash is another example of our efforts to ensure consumers are not misled and can trust the prices they see online.'
Mr. Hodson of DoorDash Canada said in his statement that 'All fees on DoorDash, which support the high-quality operations of our platform, are clearly labeled and disclosed to consumers throughout the ordering process – including a final review before payment.
'To be crystal clear, DoorDash does not hide fees from consumers or mislead them in any way. [The Competition Bureau's] application is a misguided and excessive attempt to target one of Canada's leading local commerce platforms. It unfairly singles out DoorDash, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves against these claims.'
This is not the first time the bureau has sought legal action against a company alleging misleading prices. Last September, the bureau won a deceptive marketing case against Cineplex Inc. for engaging in drip pricing by adding a mandatory $1.50 online booking fee and ordered the company to pay a financial penalty of more than $38.9-million.
Last June, the bureau reached an agreement with SiriusXM Canada to address concerns over a mandatory additional fee on subscription plans that increased the monthly cost by 10 to 20 per cent. Currently, the bureau is pursuing legal action against Canada's Wonderland for alleged false or misleading price claims.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Toronto Star
38 minutes ago
- Toronto Star
Developers unveil plans for aviation-themed playground on former Downsview Airport lands
A Toronto-based developer unveiled plans to convert a 100-foot decommissioned airplane into a playground on former Downsview Airport lands on Monday. The deconstructed plane, or 'playscape,' is part of a larger project including a public plaza at YZD, the community planned for the redevelopment of North York's former 370-acre airport.


Globe and Mail
an hour ago
- Globe and Mail
Meta Is Making a Big Bold Investment of Over $10B in Scale AI
Meta Platforms (META) is reportedly in talks to invest over $10 billion in artificial intelligence (AI) startup Scale AI. The news was first reported by Bloomberg, citing people familiar with the matter. If finalized, this investment would represent a significant shift for Meta, marking its largest external funding commitments to date. It would also be one of the largest private-sector funding deals in the AI sector to date. Confident Investing Starts Here: Easily unpack a company's performance with TipRanks' new KPI Data for smart investment decisions Receive undervalued, market resilient stocks right to your inbox with TipRanks' Smart Value Newsletter The terms of the deal remain unknown and are subject to change. The startup was valued at $13.8 billion in its most recent funding round, in which Meta, Nvidia (NVDA), and Amazon (AMZN) had participated. Bloomberg had reported earlier this year, that Scale AI was in talks for another funding round, potentially valuing the company at roughly $25 billion. Meta Is Investing Billions in Scale AI Scale AI was founded in 2016 by CEO Alexandr Wang. The company specializes in data labeling: assigning labels/tags to images, text, and other data used for training AI models. Scale AI has been growing rapidly and has become one of the prime beneficiaries of the generative AI revolution. In 2024, Scale AI generated revenue of $870 million and is set to more than double its sales this year to reach $2 billion. Scale AI serves a diverse set of customers, including Microsoft (MSFT), ChatGPT maker OpenAI, and the U.S. Department of Defense. The company uses a vast network of contract workers to scan, organize, and label troves of datasets, thus facilitating efficient AI model training. This process is crucial, since machine learning models require the usage and input of enormous amounts of data, and Scale AI's services enable companies to train their models more swiftly and with greater precision. Meta Is Going All-In on AI Meanwhile, Meta is going all-in on AI investments. It has committed to invest up to $65 billion in AI related projects this year. Although Meta does not operate its own cloud services platform, it has developed a successful series of large language AI models called Llama. Meta's Llama chatbot is used by approximately 1 billion users per month on its Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp apps. Notably, Meta and Scale AI have also partnered earlier to develop the Defense Llama model for the government. Moreover, Meta's AI models are used by U.S. government agencies and defense contractors for military applications. Last week, Meta also struck a 20-year deal with nuclear energy company Constellation Energy (CEG) to buy green credits from its Illinois nuclear plant, effective 2027. This deal ensures a stable and sustainable energy supply for Meta's massive AI and data center operations, supporting its commitment to achieving net-zero emissions. Is META a Good Company to Buy? Wall Street remains highly optimistic about Meta Platforms' long-term stock trajectory. On TipRanks, META stock has a Strong Buy consensus rating based on 41 Buys, three Holds, and one Sell rating. Also, the average Meta Platforms price target of $697.55 implies that shares are almost fully valued at current levels. Year-to-date, META stock has gained 19.3%. See more META analyst ratings


CTV News
an hour ago
- CTV News
SAAQclic ‘bumpy' as early as 2018, witness tells Gallant commission
The Gallant Commission, tasked with investigating the failures of the Société de l'assurance automobile du Québec (SAAQ) IT transition, on May 15, 2025, in Quebec City. (The Canadian Press/Jacques Boissinot) The digital transition at Quebec's automobile insurance board (SAAQ) was already 'bumpy' in 2018, the commission investigating the SAAQclic fiasco heard Monday. Sylvain Cloutier, director of the project office, testified before the Gallant commission, which travelled to Quebec City to begin its sixth week of hearings. He spoke about the coloured indicators used by his team to track progress — markers that, without clear explanation, often shifted from red to green. 'When things become increasingly chaotic, doesn't accountability matter?' asked Justice Denis Gallant, pressing Cloutier on his apparent lack of control over how the colours were assigned. Cloutier said the indicators 'on their own weren't enough' to give a full picture of the project's status. The board's vice-president of information technology, Karl Malenfant, would regularly step in to offer 'explanations.' Malenfant's name has surfaced repeatedly over the past six weeks at the Gallant commission. 'There were problems, but Mr. Malenfant didn't try to hide them,' said Cloutier. 'He's an experienced man. He's led major projects at Hydro-Québec, at Rio Tinto. He knows what he's talking about. He came in to explain things and reassure the team — not reassure as in spinning stories,' Cloutier added. 'Was everyone aware?' commission lawyer Vincent Ranger asked. 'Was Mr. Malenfant transparent about how difficult the rollout was?' 'Yes,' Cloutier replied. 'Would it be fair to say Mr. Malenfant is naturally optimistic?' Ranger followed up. 'Yes, that's true,' Cloutier said. 'But not in a head-in-the-clouds way. He likes a challenge.' 'I didn't take bribes' Cloutier also admitted Monday to manipulating a public tender worth over $1 million so it would be awarded to external consultant Stéphane Mercier. 'That was my mistake,' Cloutier acknowledged under questioning from Justice Gallant. 'I'm not saying what I did was right. But I take responsibility — it was me.' In 2017, Cloutier urgently requested the bidding threshold be lowered to $990,000 after Mercier informed him he couldn't qualify for the contract because he didn't have authorization from Quebec's financial markets authority. That authorization is required for contracts valued at more than $1 million. 'I was in a panic,' Cloutier said, recalling thinking, 'If I don't have this guy to keep going, we're in deep trouble (…) I'm losing expertise.' 'I did it with the intention of not delaying the project,' he said. 'I didn't take any bribes. I'm not going on fishing trips. I'm not sailing around on a yacht. That's not what this is.' This report by The Canadian Press was first published in French June 9, 2025.