Ripley, one of Chile's biggest department store chains, built its periodic 'Días R' sales on a simple headline: discounts on 'miles de productos' — thousands of products. The advertising named the participating brands in generic terms, and shoppers read the promise the way it was written: the sale applied across the category.
In December 2017 the Santiago Court of Appeals ruled the advertising 'induces error in a normal consumer, who, faced with that favorable commercial situation, believes the discount will apply to all products of that category — which was not the case.' The discounts in fact applied only to the specific brands named in the ad. The court also found that Comercial Eccsa, Ripley's parent, acted 'knowing or having to know' the strategy could mislead, given its track record in promotions.
The fine was small — 30 UTM, about 1.4 million Chilean pesos, roughly US$2,300 — but the ruling was the point: in Chilean consumer law, the headline of a sale ad is the offer, and the fine print cannot quietly narrow it. What 'thousands of products' promised, the shelf had to deliver.
The court fined Ripley 30 UTM for ads promising 'thousands of products' when discounts applied only to named brands, ruling the headline is the offer.
The headline promised 'thousands of products'; the discount applied only to named brands — the gap between the two was the design, not an oversight.
Retailers bet on shoppers reading the brand list as examples rather than as the whole deal; the court ruled the ad must say what the deal actually is.
The court read 'knowing or having to know' — the company's own promotion history meant the misleading framing was a choice, not a mistake.
A sale headline is a promise to every shopper. If the discount only covers named brands, the ad has to say so — 'thousands of products' is the offer a court will enforce.
The ruling became a reference case in Chilean consumer-protection coverage of promotional language versus fine print. The 'thousands of products' formula, applied to discounts that only some brands honoured, was shown to be a liability rather than a sales technique.
FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE