CMA Issues First Drip Pricing Fine Under the DMCCA: What Businesses Need to Know 

Recent changes to the UK’s consumer law regime under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 (DMCCA) have significantly reshaped the compliance landscape for businesses offering goods and services to consumers. We explored the scope and implications of those reforms in an earlier article, Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act, a consumer reform perspective.

A key feature of the new regime is the introduction of direct enforcement powers for the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA). The CMA has now exercised those powers for the first time, issuing a financial penalty for drip pricing, marking a significant escalation from guidance to active enforcement.

Understanding how drip pricing is defined under the DMCCA is therefore critical to assessing enforcement risk and compliance obligations.

What is drip pricing under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act?

One of the key changes under the new regime was the addition of drip pricing to the list of unfair commercial practices. Drip pricing occurs when only part of the price is initially advertised, with additional fees revealed incrementally during the purchase process until the full amount is disclosed at the final stage (typically when the consumer is already committed to buying).

Businesses are now required to provide the total price, inclusive of all mandatory fees, taxes, charges, and delivery costs, upfront in all “invitations to purchase”.

Where any element of the price cannot be calculated in advance, details of the charge and the method of calculation must be at least as prominent as the total price.

The DMCCA treats drip pricing as an automatically unfair commercial practice. This means that when using their enforcement powers, the CMA does not need to demonstrate that the practice would have affected the average consumer’s decision-making in order to establish a breach.

CMA issues first drip pricing fine under new direct enforcement powers

In April 2026, the CMA announced its first financial penalty under the DMCCA.

AA Driving School and BSM Driving School (both owned by Automobile Association Developments Limited) admitted liability for drip pricing and were ordered to pay a £4.2 million fine and refund over £760,000 to more than 80,000 affected learner drivers.

The infringement involved a mandatory £3 booking fee that was not included in the initial price shown to consumers.

The AA received a 40% settlement discount (available for early admission of liability and co-operation), reducing the penalty from an original £7 million. The case was concluded within five months of the investigation being publicly announced. You can read the CMA’s press release regarding the decision here.

The CMA also recently updated its case page for a drip pricing investigation into Gold’s Gym and its presentation of mandatory fees, confirming that investigations are ongoing with a further update expected in summer 2026.

How the CMA is using its direct consumer enforcement powers in practice

In a CMA blog dated 17 April 2026, the CMA reported that in its first year of direct enforcement it had:

• opened investigations into 14 businesses and settled with two;
• ordered £760,000 in consumer refunds;
• imposed fines totalling £4.7 million;
• issued 157 advisory and warning letters; and
• sent 46 information notices.

The CMA also issued a message to businesses urging them to focus on compliance with price transparency, as well as other DMCCA reforms such as the ban on fake reviews.

The CMA reminded businesses that new rules on subscription contracts are expected to come into force in spring 2027, introducing significant new requirements around auto-renewal notices, cancellation mechanisms, and reminder obligations. We will provide further guidance on these changes in a separate update closer to commencement.

The CMA may open an investigation into any person where it has reasonable grounds to suspect that they have committed, are committing, or are likely to commit an infringing commercial practice, and/or they have assisted or facilitated such a practice.

CMA price transparency guidance

The CMA’s final price transparency guidance, published in November 2025, elaborates on the practical requirements for businesses:

• Mandatory charges such as booking fees, delivery charges, and service fees must be included in the headline price from the first price a consumer sees (including in online adverts, emails, and search results).
• Shared liability extends beyond the seller to those “making an invitation to purchase”. Online marketplaces, price comparison sites, and influencers may be liable, provided they are acting as a trader, making an invitation to purchase presenting price, and enabling a transactional decision. It is therefore important that traders using other businesses to market their products ensure that they have provided those businesses with all the information required by the DMCCA and that those businesses are contractually required to comply with their obligations under the DMCCA.
• “Invitation to purchase” is defined broadly, encompassing an email or text message promotion, app banners, and marketplace search result pages. It includes commercial communications indicating characteristics and price that enable a consumer to make a purchase decision.
• Space or time limitations (e.g., character limits in digital ads, or time limits on radio) will not generally justify omitting mandatory charges from a headline price.

What businesses should do now to manage drip pricing risk

The CMA has signalled that drip pricing, fake reviews, and online choice architecture remain its enforcement priorities.

This first fine demonstrates its commitment to using these new powers, and ongoing investigations into companies including StubHub, Viagogo, Gold’s Gym, Appliances Direct, and Marks Electrical continue. A list of ongoing investigations is published here.

Businesses should note that the penalty framework under the DMCCA allows fines of up to 10% of global annual turnover, making compliance a significant commercial priority.

To reduce the risk of enforcement action, businesses should consider the following steps:

• Audit all customer-facing pricing to ensure mandatory fees, taxes, and delivery charges are included in headline prices from the outset.
• Review arrangements and contracts with third-party marketplaces, affiliates, and influencers to confirm they are displaying compliant pricing information, and ensure agreements include appropriate compliance warranties, indemnities, and audit rights.
• Ensure any variable charges that cannot be calculated in advance are clearly explained alongside the headline price.
• Train customer-facing and marketing teams on the new requirements and the potential consequences of non-compliance.
• For businesses involved in M&A or investment activity; include consumer law compliance (including drip pricing practices) as part of due diligence. The AA/BSM Driving Schools case demonstrates that enforcement can conclude within five months of announcement.

Need support assessing your drip pricing risk?

The CMA’s first fine under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act shows how quickly price transparency issues can escalate once regulatory scrutiny begins. Businesses with consumer‑facing pricing models may wish to review whether mandatory fees, delivery charges or variable costs are being clearly presented from the first price a customer sees.

If you would like support reviewing pricing structures, marketing materials or third‑party arrangements for compliance with the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, our commercial services team can help.

We regularly advise on price transparency, consumer law compliance and risk mitigation, including proactive audits and support during CMA investigations.

This content is provided for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is not intended to address the circumstances of any individual or entity, nor should it be relied upon as a substitute for specific advice from a qualified solicitor. The information reflects the legal position as at the date specified and may be subject to change. If you require advice on a specific matter, please contact us directly.