Originally Posted by
exwannabe
Though I think the "bait and switch" argument fails, the DOT does have a rule that the entire price must be displayed up front.
An occasional error would be one thing. But clearly this issue is not such.
I think complaints on violation of the DOT price disclosure regs could get some traction. Particularly if in mass.
+1
It's not a violation or bait and switch, exactly. But the persistent and ongoing nature of it, and the cache (if it is that) not being cleared and the same (wrong, non-available) price still being offered after it errored out and said N/A (and thus should have cleared and cache and start displaying the current price in future searches), is the key here. Multiple DOT complaints on this would gain traction likely - if the matter is closely reviewed, but not just one or a few.