Traders offering discounted goods will now have to state the price at which they sold the product in the previous period.

This is foreseen in the government’s amendment on consumer protection, which makes it more challenging to present false discounts and was approved by the House of Commons on Friday. At the same time, sellers will have to give consumers information in product reviews that the product has been rated by those who have bought and used it.

The bill will also extend from 14 days to 30 days. The period within which a purchase contract concluded, for example, at a sales event, can be withdrawn.

The amendment, which takes over the rules of the new European regulations, will now be submitted to senators for consideration.

Under the draft, traders will now have to state the lowest price they offered the product before the promotion was applied for no less than 30 days. If they have shown the effect for a shorter period, they will have to state the lowest price for the elapsed period. This is to prevent consumers from being misled about the amount of the alleged discount.

However, the measure will not apply, for example, to loyalty schemes or to advertisements where traders boast of generally low prices. But it will not apply to food and other perishable or short-lived goods.

In addition to the rights under the Civil Code, consumers who are injured by the unfair practices of a trader should now have the right to withdraw from the contract within 90 days. He could also demand a reasonable reduction in the price. He would not be able to withdraw from the contract if the seller proves this is unreasonable, given the seriousness of the unfair practice.

In the case of reviews, sellers would be obliged to clarify to consumers that the study was given by people who have bought or used the product. The publication of false reviews will be an unfair commercial practice under the amendment, claiming that a thought comes from consumers who have purchased the product without the seller verifying or ensuring that the claim is valid.

Source