If you’ve ever hovered over something you didn’t quite want at a price you weren’t sure about, while a countdown timer ran and a message told you it was in high demand, that pressure may not have been real, and where it isn’t, it can break the law.
The Competition and Markets Authority took Emma Matratzen GmbH, Emma Sleep GmbH and Emma Sleep UK Limited to court over exactly that. In May 2026 the company admitted breaking consumer law by using misleading countdown timers, false “high demand” messages and discount claims that created false pressure to buy. The court confirmed a settlement with binding undertakings to stop those practices and to make sure future claims are clear, accurate and don’t create a misleading sense of urgency, enforceable by the court, with contempt proceedings and significant penalties if breached.
What did the July judgment decide?
A separate issue went to trial: “was/now” reference pricing, where an item is shown as reduced from a higher price. Judgment came on 30 July 2026.
Here the CMA did less well than the headlines suggested. The High Court found Emma Sleep had infringed the law on a number of the breaches it had already admitted, but made no further findings of infringement, and invited both sides to agree the terms of a further order. The CMA has temporarily withdrawn its guidance on online mattress sales while it works out what the judgment means.
Why did this become a policy announcement?
Ten days later, the government announced a consultation, launching this autumn, on whether fake “was” prices, invented discounts and misleading recommended retail prices should be added to the list of practices automatically banned under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. Its stated reason: under current law, enforcers find these cases difficult to bring.
The Emma Sleep case is a fair illustration of that difficulty. The urgency tactics were admitted and are now under binding undertakings. The reference-pricing question, the one that needed a trial, didn’t work. Adding a practice to the banned list means it counts as unfair automatically, without an enforcer having to prove the effect on shoppers case by case.
What it means for you
Nothing in your rights changes yet; a consultation is a long way from a rule. But urgency devices and “was” prices are regulated, not decorative, and there is a live case in which a company admitted as much.
If you think you were misled into a purchase, the route is the same as any faulty-sale complaint. Complain to the retailer in writing, say specifically what you were told and what turned out to be untrue, and keep screenshots — a countdown timer leaves no trace once you close the tab, so capture it at the time. The CMA doesn’t resolve individual complaints, though you can report a business to it, and reports feed the cases it brings.
If you’re mid-complaint with a retailer, our guide to writing a complaint letter covers what to include. If you’ve been ignored, the no-response guide covers what comes next.
Common questions
Are countdown timers on shopping sites legal?
They’re regulated, not banned. Where the urgency is false , a timer that resets, stock claims that aren’t true, it can breach consumer law, as Emma Sleep admitted.
What did Emma Sleep admit?
Using misleading countdown timers, false high demand messages and discount claims that created false pressure to buy, and it gave binding undertakings to stop.
Can the CMA get my money back?
No. The CMA doesn’t resolve individual complaints, though you can report a business to it. For a refund, complain to the retailer.