The arrival of 99Food in São Paulo shook up the delivery sector with a highly impactful campaign, including R$ 99 coupons, free deliveries, and aggressive incentives to attract consumers, restaurants, and delivery drivers.
With a profile reminiscent of Guerrilla Marketing – which consists of a creative strategy aiming to make a significant impact on the public through unexpected or even provocative actions – the delivery service’s debut in São Paulo even featured an Urban Taximeter, referencing iFood, its direct competitor.
Given the volume of announced benefits, questions arise about the legal limits of these practices and the possibility of the company being held accountable if the offers are not fulfilled. According to lawyer Paulo Bonilha, partner at Ambiel Bonilha Advogados and expert in Business Consumer Law, companies must be cautious when promoting offers of this magnitude. ‘The Consumer Protection Code, in its Article 31, establishes the obligation that offers must be presented correctly and clearly, so that if they lack these qualities, the provider can be held responsible, including regarding the mandatory fulfillment of the offer. In other words, the provider will be required to honor the offer as advertised, regardless of any contrary intentions. This is the principle of offer obligation,’ he explains.
When it comes to free deliveries, special attention must also be paid to how they are advertised. As Bonilha states, ‘the company can only restrict the offer if such conditions are clearly specified in its presentation.’ This means hidden or unclear conditions could constitute abusive practices toward consumers.
Liability also extends to the pricing advertised on the apps. ‘In these situations, 99Food could even be required to honor the offer as advertised. The only exception would be in cases of gross error,’ the expert states, commenting on possible discrepancies between advertised prices and actual charges.
Regarding moral or collective damages arising from potential consumer disappointment, the analysis is more restrictive. ‘It does not seem plausible that, in the current context, the Public Prosecutor’s Office would pursue a claim of this nature. This would only occur in extreme cases of harm to consumers, where the practice was repeated, which we do not foresee at this time,’ the lawyer assesses.
99Food’s entry into the São Paulo market signals fierce competition in the delivery app sector. However, experts warn that the sustainability of such campaigns will depend not only on commercial strategy but also on strict adherence to the Consumer Protection Code, which ensures transparency, clarity, and fulfillment of advertised offers.
Source:
Paulo Bonilha – partner at Ambiel Bonilha Advogados and expert in Business Consumer Law. Specialized in Law at CEU Law School. Specializes in Legal Metrology and procedures before CONAR.
