Commerce Commission files charges against Noel Leeming over ‘Price Promise' claims
Listening to articles is free for open-access content—explore other articles or learn more about text-to-speech.
The Commerce Commission has filed criminal charges against retail electronics chain Noel Leeming for allegedly misleading customers with its "Price Promise". Photo / Supplied
The Commerce Commission has filed criminal charges against retail electronics chain Noel Leeming for allegedly misleading customers with its 'Price Promise'.
The commission alleges multiple breaches of the Fair Trading Act by Noel Leeming which is owned by The Warehouse Group.
'For over a decade Noel Leeming has prominently promoted their 'Price Promise,' which is their commitment to match any competitor's price. We believe their price promise claim was misleading and in breach of the Fair Trading Act,' Commerce Commission deputy chair Anne Callinan said.
'Price match advertising gives the impression that customers will be able to show up and get a match for competitors' prices… we believe Noel Leeming's price promise had many limitations and conditions which weren't made obvious to customers and made any price matches difficult to obtain.'
Callinan said it is crucial businesses promoting any price match offer factor in the overall impression of the claims they make, and that all information is clear to customers.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
6 hours ago
- RNZ News
Geographic price gap for shopping 'unacceptable'
The new report proves consumers pay a premium for the lack of competition, says the Grocery Action Group. Photo: Fair prices for groceries should not depend on a shopper's postcode, a consumer advocacy group says The Commerce Commission's Grocery Report - released yesterday - highlighted the fact that areas like Auckland enjoyed more competition and cheaper prices. The Grocery Action Group said the commission's report had no good news for consumers. Chair Sue Chetwin said the lack of competition in smaller centres meant the markups were much higher, even though overheads such as rent were much lower. "In rural areas and smaller towns where New Zealand's supermarket choices are narrow or non-existent, the report confirms what those living there already know - that consumers pay a premium for the lack of competition," she said. "This kind of geographic price gap is unacceptable. Fair prices shouldn't depend on your postcode." Chetwin said on top of the 4.6 percent increase in grocery prices for the year to May, there were other findings in the report that were thoroughly alarming. "For instance it notes we are paying higher than the OECD average for groceries even though we earn well below the average OECD wage. "Another disturbing fact is the prices that the supermarket chains pay their suppliers are subsidised by around $5b in rebates, discounts and promotional payments paid by suppliers," Chetwin said. She said the report confirmed Kiwi consumers were paying way over the odds for their groceries. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Scoop
18 hours ago
- Scoop
Genesis, Contact, Meridian, And Mercury Seek Authorisation For Strategic Energy Reserve Huntly Firming Option
The Commerce Commission (the Commission) has received an application from New Zealand's four largest electricity generator-retailers (Genesis Energy Limited, Contact Energy Limited, Meridian Energy Limited, and Mercury NZ Limited) (the Gentailers) seeking authorisation to enter into and give effect to a series of arrangements referred to as the Strategic Energy Reserve Huntly Firming Option. Authorisation is sought until 31 December 2035. The arrangements are proposed to provide a commercial incentive for Genesis to maintain Rankine Unit 2, a gas/coal-fired unit at Huntly Power Station, for use as 'dry year cover' when other forms of electricity generation (such as hydro generators) may not be sufficient to ensure security of supply. The arrangements provide each of Contact, Meridian, and Mercury with an option to access spot price electricity cover in exchange for an annual premium, which Genesis may use to contribute to the cost of maintaining, operating, and resourcing the Rankine Units. The Commission has published a statement of preliminary issues relating to this application. The statement outlines the key issues that the Commission considers important in deciding whether or not to grant authorisation for the Gentailers' proposed arrangements. The Commission invites interested parties to provide comments on the likely benefits and detriments of the proposed arrangements, including any likely competitive effects. Public submissions on the application can be sent by email to registrar@ with the reference 'Huntly authorisation' in the subject line. Any submissions should be received by close of business on 27 August 2025. The statutory deadline for making a determination on this authorisation is 16 February 2026. However, the Commission appreciates the urgency with regard to this application and will progress this as soon as possible. The Statement of Preliminary Issues and a public version of the application for authorisation is available on the Commission's case register.
The Spinoff
21 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.'
