logo
Four common supermarket price errors to look out for

Four common supermarket price errors to look out for

RNZ News25-07-2025
Foodstuffs and Woolworths say they both have full refund policies.
Photo:
RNZ / Cole Eastham-Farrelly, Simon Rogers
Consumer NZ says supermarkets are still making pricing errors, despite increasing pressure and scrutiny on them.
Charges have been filed and a number of supermarkets have
pleaded guilty to breaching the Fair Trading Act
due to inaccurate pricing and misleading specials.
But Consumer NZ says misleading specials are
still costing shoppers tens of millions of dollars a year
and has launched a petition calling for tougher penalties for breaches of the act.
It provided examples of a number of ways that people could be caught out by misleading signage in supermarkets.
A dodgy multibuy refers to a situation where the individual price and the multibuy price don't add up to a saving.
A mince special where a tray of meat was $4 or people could buy three for $20.
Photo:
supplied
Consumer NZ pointed to this mince special where a tray of meat was $4 or people could buy three for $20.
In another case, packaging seemed to be making a confusing difference.
The Gingernuts that were selling for $5 but the club price for a twin-pack was $5.59.
Photo:
supplied
Two individual backs of Gingernuts were selling for $5 but the club price for a 500g twin-pack was $5.59.
Sometimes the price on the shelf tag does not match what you pay at checkout.
A box of Coca Cola a customer paid more at checkout for than the shelf price tag.
Photo:
Supplied
In this case, supplied by Consumer, the price tag on the shelf said $27, but the customer paid more than $35 at the checkout.
Sometimes it's just hard to work out what the price is.
Double cream brie with two prices.
Photo:
supplied
Consumer provided an example of double cream brie was "reduced" to $10.60 for a quick sale - or was it on sale for $9.80?
Sometimes it seems as though there are multiple labels for the same item.
In this case, two signs had two different prices for a single avocado.
A sign saying a single avocado is $1.99.
Photo:
supplied
Another sign at the same supermarket saying a single avocado is $1.69.
Photo:
supplied
"One said $1.69. The other said $1.99," Consumer NZ spokesperson Abby Damen said.
"The customer was charged $1.99. She returned two days later to ask what could be done about the pricing error. She was offered a refund of the price difference but after pointing out the supermarket's new refund policy, she was refunded $2 and also kept her avocado."
Chief executive at Consumer Jon Duffy said anyone who was charged more than the shelf price was entitled by law to a refund of the difference.
He said both supermarket chains promised a full refund in that scenario, but consumers sometimes had to know that was what was available.
A Foodstuffs spokesperson said with more than 14,000 products in a typical supermarket, and prices changing frequently due to supplier costs, promotions or new product liens, pricing was a complex job.
"But for our customers, it's simple. They rightly expect the price on the shelf to match what they pay at the checkout," he said.
"We take pricing accuracy as seriously as health and safety, aiming for zero errors.
"Across our local, family-owned stores, we manage tens of thousands of price labels and process millions of transactions every week, and we've invested in better systems, daily checks and electronic shelf labels to help get it right.
"If we do get it wrong, our policy is that the customer gets a refund and keeps the product. We've also strengthened staff training and store processes to make sure pricing is clear and accurate."
Woolworths said it had more 3.5 million transactions in our stores each week "and sometimes errors do occur".
"When they do, we try to make things right, through our long-standing and market-leading refund policy. Under that policy, if a customer is charged more than the advertised price for a product, they get a full refund and can keep the product."
Duffy said Consumer had received 20 complaints about supermarket pricing since Tuesday. A normal rate would be two a day, he said.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

How did Ellen Tamati's face end up on Hobson's Pledge billboards?
How did Ellen Tamati's face end up on Hobson's Pledge billboards?

The Spinoff

time4 hours ago

  • The Spinoff

How did Ellen Tamati's face end up on Hobson's Pledge billboards?

The lobby group has pulled its latest campaign against Māori wards after the woman whose photo it used without her knowledge expressed her distress. But a lawyer says the use of the photo has 'pretty clearly' breached the Fair Trading Act. Hobson's Pledge has apologised to Te Arawa woman Ellen Tamati and pulled a billboard campaign that featured her image alongside the words 'My mana doesn't need a mandate. Vote no to Māori wards.' Aukaha News reported this morning that Tamati's face was used without her knowledge for the campaign. An upset Tamati spoke to the outlet about waking up to missed calls from her mokopuna. 'I didn't know what she was talking about, I had no idea. I didn't realise my face was on a billboard. She kept saying to me 'Nan, what's going on?' and I didn't know what to say to her 'cause I don't understand.' Tamati was adamant she did not give permission for her photo to be used on the Hobson's Pledge billboards, and said she was staunchly opposed to the message they were sending. 'I did not give any permission to use my mug, my moko kauae,' she said, holding back tears. When asked what she would say to those who used her face for their campaign, she was lost for words, eventually saying, 'that's not me… they have taken… that's not me'. A spokesperson for Lumo Digital Outdoor, the company responsible for the digital billboards, told The Spinoff that Hobson's Pledge had asked the company to remove them – 'not because legally they didn't have a right to use it', but because of the pain the campaign had caused Tamati. The billboards had been spotted in Rotorua, Hamilton, Whangārei and Christchurch. But how did Ellen Tamati's face end up on them in the first place? 'Editorial use only' Stock image photography is a thriving business in New Zealand. News outlets around the country need images to illustrate their stories and, without in-house photographers, rely heavily on stock photography platforms to provide suitable photos. All manner of private businesses and government agencies also pay for stock imagery to use in various content. At Waitangi Day celebrations in 2025, travel photographer Rafael Ben Ari took dozens of photos of landscapes and attendees. He licensed his photos to two stock imagery websites – iStock by Getty and Shutterstock – where they are labelled 'editorial use only', meaning they can only be used by in a newsworthy or human interest context, for example to accompany news reporting (in this instance, most likely be reporting on Waitangi Day), rather than for commercial or promotional purposes. It is unclear whether or not Tamati was aware that a photo of her was available on these platforms. Being filmed or photographed while in a public space is not in itself a breach of privacy, and few people ever see the photos of themselves appear in these circumstances. In a statement acknowledging Tamati's distress, a Hobson's Pledge spokesperson said the image was 'legally purchased through a reputable stock photography provider, and all rights to use it in public-facing materials were secured'. Speaking to The Spinoff, Hobson's Pledge leader Don Brash said that he was under the impression the image, purchased from iStock, was 'fully available for use by whoever bought it'. When asked if he was aware that the image was marked for editorial use only, Brash said no, 'I was not aware of that at all.' Getty Images, which owns iStock, did not provide comment before publication but its terms and conditions state that images marked for editorial use only may not be used 'for any commercial, promotional, advertorial, endorsement, advertising, gambling/betting/gaming uses, or merchandising purpose'. Is it legal? According to intellectual property lawyer Earl Gray, Hobson's Pledge is 'pretty clearly' in breach of the Fair Trading Act. 'This is clearly advertising,' he told The Spinoff, in reference to the 'editorial only' clause. He pointed out that iStock's terms specify that editorial-use-only images are 'not model or property released', meaning Hobson's Pledge could not use the image in a way 'that suggests that the model has endorsed anything they're saying'. 'In this case, Ellen Tamati has clearly not said what they're saying. They're clearly in breach of the iStock terms and and because of that, they're also, I think, pretty clearly in breach of the Fair Trading Act,' said Gray. Liability could even extend to the billboard company, Lumo, for hosting the ad: 'They've put it up so they've potentially made the reproduction, or published the reproduction. If you're outside of any licence and you use a copyright work, then you're potentially infringing copyright.' What next? According to Gray, Tamati or her whānau – or anyone else aggrieved by the campaign's use of her face – could lay a complaint. 'Pretty much anyone can make a complaint about a breach of the Fair Trading Act, and indeed, the Commerce Commission could as well. Given that that person will at least feel damaged in the sense of her reputation amongst her friends, she would have a right to bring a claim for a breach of the Fair Trading Act,' he said. 'I imagine most billboard companies would have terms and conditions that at least require the advertiser to be responsible for ensuring that the advertisement doesn't breach any any laws, including infringing copyright or defamation or breaching the Fair Trading Act.' Why Ellen Tamati? The image of Tamati is striking – a close portrait. Brash said her photo was chosen 'because it was an image of a strong Maori woman who was ideal for our purposes'. At the end of its statement, Hobson's Pledge said, 'regardless of the positive message we were promoting, we do not want anyone to feel distressed by our materials'. Tamati, the short-lived face of a 'vote no to Māori wards' campaign, disagrees. 'Please go and vote for your Māori wards,' she said this morning, 'because we need them.'

Camp opens eyes to agribusiness
Camp opens eyes to agribusiness

Otago Daily Times

time13 hours ago

  • Otago Daily Times

Camp opens eyes to agribusiness

An Invercargill schoolgirl was never serious about a career in agribusiness until joining 25 students in an educational camp in Canterbury. Southland Girls' High School's Keely Gorrie attended a three-day live-in programme with the other year-12 students from around the country to learn about career pathways in the food production industry. The Farm2Future educational camp, funded by Rabobank, took them to a range of agribusiness operations across the region. They visited Rakaia Island Dairy Farm, Willisden Farms, Original Foods Baking Company, NZ Merino, PGG Wrightson, Farm Source and Foodstuffs. For Miss Gorrie, who lives with her family in Invercargill, the camp was an eye-opener for a possible career direction. She said the business tours were valuable for figuring out what she wanted to do in her working life. "I'm not off a farm, but I have done a bit of work and looked into the animal — more practical — side of farming, but they had a bunch of information about the agribusiness side of things so it was really interesting to see and have a look." At this stage another year of school lies ahead of Miss Gorrie before she commits to either studying or joining the workforce. "I'm definitely thinking about a bunch of things as I enjoy the on-farm working with the animals, but like I say, seeing all of these different career paths in agribusiness is definitely something to consider." The programme featured a panel discussion of young agribusiness professionals talking about their roles in the sector. This year's camp intake was selected from more than 90 year-12 students who put their names forward. Miss Gorrie said she particularly liked learning about Original Foods Baking Company and Foodstuffs at tours to their operations. "Original Foods had a quiz which was fun and the lady who we were mainly speaking to talked about how she started on the line and worked her way up and got connections through that, so I thought that was kind of cool." Watching the manufacturing of donuts and slab cakes and learning about the process of food ingredients produced from farms before that point was educational, she said. She was selected after making a video explaining why she would be a good candidate for the camp and writing a cover note about herself. "One of the things I really liked about it was all the people running it and all the people we visited at the different businesses were all very open to the fact you actually don't have to be off a farm to be involved in the agriculture sector. And I thought that was really quite inclusive." The programme was organised by Lincoln University students on a Future Leader Scholarship for school-leavers showing high academic and leadership promise. Rabobank Upper South Island client council member Ed Tapp said the students' camp experiences would give them valuable insights into how food travelled from farms to the table. He said the aim was to introduce them to the opportunities and variety of career paths available in the food and agriculture sector. Many of the students had come from farming backgrounds, but more than half of them had grown up in urban areas with little to no exposure to agriculture. "There's a real disconnect between urban youth and knowledge of the opportunities within the agricultural industry. And it's crucial that we continue efforts to strengthen the urban-rural relationship."

New World denys leaving Victoria Park workers jobless
New World denys leaving Victoria Park workers jobless

RNZ News

time5 days ago

  • RNZ News

New World denys leaving Victoria Park workers jobless

employment 20 minutes ago New World is denying allegations it's passing over workers who lost their jobs after a fire destroyed a flagship store in supermarket. 189 people employed at the Victoria Park supermarket get their last pay cheque on Monday. Foodstuffs said it was optimistic about finding jobs for the workers at a new store in Point Chevalier but First Union said that of the 80 positions on offer at the new store only half are being filled with staff from Victoria Park. It's also raised concerns about older and disabled workers missing out on positions. Organiser with Workers First Union, Jas Giri spoke to Lisa Owen.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store