Earlier this month, district attorneys from seven California counties reached a court settlement with Target for over $5-million after they sued the chain for allegedly charging shoppers more than the advertised price on some items.
In addition to the run-of-the-mill pricing violations like leaving old sale signs up and then charging customers the full price at the checkout, the DAs alleged something very unusual in their complaint:
*MOUSE PRINT:
“..advertising, posting, marking or quoting a price for a commodity on Target.com or via the Target mobile application (“Target app”) when deployed by a consumer outside the perimeter of the store [such as at home] and then advertising, posting, marking or quoting a different price for that commodity on Target.com or via the Target App when deployed in-store by the same consumer…
..advertising, posting, marking or quoting a price for a commodity on Target.com or via the Target App that is simultaneously available for purchase in a store at a different price without clearly and conspicuously disclosing the sales channel — online or in-store — at which the commodity may be obtained at the stated price.”
With respect to this latter point, Target was apparently not making clear on the Internet whether the price it was showing for specific items was the online price, the in-store price, or was valid for both.
The other issue is a bit trickier to explain. The DAs alleged that Target used technology called “geofencing” to send a different set of prices on some items to consumers’ cellphones when they were close to or in the store compared to the prices displayed when at home. In some cases, a consumer who saw, say, a vacuum cleaner on sale for $99.99 in the Target app or on their website at home, may have discovered when visiting the store to actually look at the item that the price had changed in the app/website to reflect a higher in-store price of $109.99.
Hypothetical ExampleIn the settlement with the California DAs, Target is required to maintain an elaborate price verification and audit program checking hundreds of prices weekly. It has to correct the inconsistencies it finds in those price checks and also when customers bring a discrepancy to the attention of store personnel.
Target is also being required to clearly disclose on its website and app specifically where the advertised price shown is valid (in-store, online, or both). And with respect to displaying a different set of prices to customers who enter the store, the settlement says:
“Target will not use Geofencing in conjunction with the Target App or Target.com such that the price of any product advertised as available when purchased online on the Target App or Target.com either (1) increases or (2) switches to a price advertised as available when purchased at a store based solely on the geographic location of the user.”
Both the Sonoma County DA’s office and the one in San Diego County declined to provide further clarification of this and other issues.
But, three cheers for the DAs of California and the weights and measures departments in those counties who continue to watch out for shoppers on these types of pocketbook consumer issues when many state attorneys general ignore them.
Incidentally, back in 2019, the NBC affiliate in Minneapolis (Target’s hometown), conducted an investigation demonstrating how Target sometimes charges a higher price in-store than it does online. Don’t get confused by the story’s reference to a lower “parking lot price.” It is the same price you would see at Target.com using your computer or cellphone at home.
After that segment aired, Target said it would make clear whether a price shown on your phone was an in-store price or an online price.
See also: Our recent story of how prices can vary significantly from one Target location to another.
Not just in California… happened to me in Florida, too.
It really is a pain when you want to know what your local store, such as Walgreen’s or Target, charges for an item, but their website will only show you the on-line price and not the price you will have to pay if you go to the store to make your purchase.
Granted Target stores will match their on-line price if it’s lower, but it can be a real pain to make that happen since the procedure seems to vary from store to store and even day to day. Some times the cashier can do it at the register although there is a good chance that when you ask they won’t know what you are talking about. Other times you have to go to the service desk to get it done. My experience has been that if I go directly to the service desk they tell me it can be done at the register and if I go to the register they tell me I have to go to the service desk.
One more thing. Targets is terrible about posting correct pricing info on their counters and that’s IF you can find any price posting at all. I recently bought four items in one trip and only one of them rang in at the posted price.
In regards to the geo-fencing comment:
This seems similar to what Best Buy was doing. I remember way back when Best Buy got in trouble because if you checked a price on the website and then went to the store to purchase the product, you might find that the price is different. When you would bring the issue up to a store associate they would, of course, pull it up on “the website” which would actually be an intranet site which has pricing identical to the in store pricing.
https://www.cnet.com/culture/connecticut-ag-investigating-best-buy-sales-tactics-9693982/
So they follow the Best Buy model. Another reason not to grant location access to retail apps and websites. Staples and Walgreens do the same thing. One price online, a different price in store. Walgreens won’t even price match their own website
I’ve been a victim of this disgusting “bait and switch” tactic by Target. This pricing strategy should be illegal. There should only be one price and shoppers should feel secure in knowing when they go online, that the price they see is the one they will pay in-store also.
I’ve seen this pricing tactic evolve over the last few years and I find it dishonest, as it never works out in the customer’s favor. If you want to pay what’s advertised, you must do your homework and know what the price is. Don’t let them cow you into believing there are several prices for the same item. It’s dishonest and not honorable.
The Target store I go to in Virginia does this all the time. So much so that I make a shopping list and write down the price of every item that I viewed on the website before going to the store. At my store generally the cashier can do the price match on the spot but sometimes I don’t notice it until I’ve already paid and then I have to go to the customer service counter. I think if you do the online order for in-store pickup you get that web price but I don’t really like to shop that way. I don’t know why Target thinks this is okay because it ends up alienating customers and causing them to trust Target a lot less. Most of Target’s policies are customer friendly but they need to rethink this dual pricing system
Better to shop at a store that doesn’t engage in shady behavior.
I hope with the fine they are forced to end this practice. This is super shady for sure.
This happened to me at Walmart. I rarely shop there but needed an item urgently for a project so I went online to see if it was in the store rather than waste time driving there. It was so I printed it out and went to the store. The store price was more and the manager refused to honor the online price unless I ordered it online for store pickup.
Best Buy did same thing and got caught years ago