Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Chapter 2, Section 1, Article 6, 1., (b)

It constitutes a misleading commercial practice to state that a service has a certain coverage, whereas in reality it appears that that service does not offer such coverage.

The Competition Authority examined the so-called "Rally" campaign of the defendant, popularizing its mobile internet network. The defendant published advertisements in several different media, including TV publicity, the defendant's website, online advertisements, etc., stating that its mobile internet network is "countrywide" and accessible "everywhere".

Based on thorough examinations, the Authority found that this information was not correct.

Furthermore, besides positively praising its own services, the defendant in the TV commercials criticized severely the network accessibility of its competitors. In summary, the basic message of the commercial was that the defendant's services are "countrywide" and accessible "everywhere", while the network of its two competitors could not offer such guarantees.

 

The Competition Authority, taking into account that it was established that the coverage of the services was not actually "countrywide", decided that the commercial in question constituted a misleading commercial practice.

The Authority, while assessing the fine to be imposed on the defendant, also took into consideration the aggravating fact that the commercial was broadcasted during an intensive 2 months, thus having reached a significant number of consumers, and that the defendant had previously been fined already for unfair commercial practices towards consumers.

 

Does it constitute a misleading commercial practice to state that a service has a certain coverage, whereas in reality it appears that that service does not offer such coverage?

URL: http://www.gvh.hu/domain2/files/modules/module25/22883F81D59694225.pdf

Full text: Full text

No results available

No results available

The Competition Authority imposed a fine of HUF 30,000,000 (approx. EUR 100,000) on the defendant.