99Food may face legal liability if it fails to honor promotions, expert points out

The arrival of 99Food in São Paulo has stirred the delivery sector with a high-impact campaign, which includes R$ 99 coupons, free deliveries, and aggressive incentives to attract consumers, restaurants, and delivery drivers.

With a profile reminiscent of Guerrilla Marketing – a creative strategy aimed at generating significant public impact through unexpected or even provocative actions – the launch of the delivery service in São Paulo even featured an "Urban Taximeter," alluding to its direct competitor, iFood.

Given the volume of announced benefits, questions arise regarding the legal limits of such practices and the possibility of holding the company accountable if the offers are not fulfilled. According to attorney Paulo Bonilha, partner at Ambiel Bonilha Advogados and specialist in Business Consumer Law,companies must exercise caution when promoting offers of this magnitude. "The Consumer Defense Code, in its Article 31, establishes the mandatory requirement that offers must be communicated correctly and clearly, such that if they lack these attributes, the provider can be held responsible, including concerning the mandatory fulfillment of the offer. In other words, the provider will be obliged to honor the offer as communicated, regardless of any potential contrary intention on their part. This is the principle of offer bindingness," he explains.

In the case of free deliveries, special attention is also required in the manner of promotion. According to Bonilha, "the company can only restrict the offer if such a condition is clearly specified in its presentation." This means that hidden or non-transparent conditions may constitute an abusive practice towards the consumer.

Responsibilities also extend to the pricing advertised on the apps. "In these situations, 99Food could even be compelled to honor the offer as advertised. Such an obligation would only not apply in the case of a gross error," states the expert, commenting on potential discrepancies between advertised prices and those actually charged.

Regarding moral or collective damages resulting from potential consumer expectation frustrations, the analysis is more restrictive. "It does not seem to me that, in the current context, the Public Prosecutor's Office would pursue a claim of this nature. This would only occur in the event of extreme harm to the consumer, where the practice has been repeated, which we cannot foresee at the moment," assesses the attorney.

99Food's entry into the São Paulo market signals fierce competition in the delivery app sector. However, experts warn that the sustainability of these campaigns will depend not only on commercial strategy but also on strict compliance with the Consumer Defense Code, which guarantees transparency, clarity, and fulfillment of advertised offers.

Source:

Paulo Bonilha – partner at Ambiel Bonilha Advogados and specialist in Business Consumer Law. Post-graduate degree in Law from CEU Law School. Specialized practice in Legal Metrology and procedures before CONAR.