The Italian Competition Authority considered two distinct unfair commercial practices.
(1) According to the Authority, between 2008 and 2010 the trader advertised its services online indicating on its website several lucrative but incomplete or non-existent offers.
In fact, only at the moment of booking a consumer would know the final price of the advertised service.
The investigation revealed that on the defendant's website a particular price ("as from") was advertised, while at the end of the booking process, often a higher price was indicated.
Additionally, the Authority found that the defendant omitted relevant information regarding some costs, which were revealed only at the end of the booking process, or in some cases, not explained at all (e.g. credit card costs, agency fee).
The authority emphasised that, according to its established case law, the price indicated by a trader should include, from the beginning, every economic burden imposed on consumer and relating offers must allow an immediate and clear perception of terms and conditions of the offer.
(2) The Authority further found another unfair commercial practice.
The trader offered an optional insurance policy, "Opodo all-Inclusive", which was selected by default during the booking process (i.e., consumers had to opt-out).
In this way an additional service was activated without the express consent of a consumer. Consumers were required to expressly state that they were not interested in purchasing this optional service.
The Authority found this kind of selection misleading because it deceived consumers regarding the nature (voluntary or mandatory) of the concerned service.