好色tv

The extra charges range from service and delivery fees to amounts sought for couriering things a further distance, placing smaller orders or making purchases in B.C., where DoorDash has to comply with minimum wage regulations for gig workers.

The bureau alleged the charges were sometimes framed as if they were taxes, when in reality, they are fees imposed at DoorDash鈥檚 discretion.

The fees resulted in customers paying higher prices than advertised and amounted to a deceptive practice known as drip pricing, which the bureau alleges DoorDash may have used for close to a decade to make nearly from $1 billion from mandatory fees.

The bureau is asking the Competition Tribunal to order the company to stop the practice, cease portraying fees as taxes, pay a penalty and issue restitution to affected consumers.

DoorDash is pushing back on the requests, saying "it does not hide fees from consumers or mislead them in any way."

"This application is a misguided and excessive attempt to target one of Canada鈥檚 leading local commerce platforms," DoorDash spokesperson Trent Hodson said in a statement to The 好色tv Press.

"It unfairly singles out DoorDash, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves against these claims.鈥�

The Competition Bureau has been more aggressive in its fight against drip pricing since the Competition Act was amended in June 2022 to more clearly distinguish the practice as harmful, giving regulators more room to pursue companies who engage in such activity.

The bureau accused Cineplex Inc. of drip pricing in May 2023, eventually winning a $38.9-million fine against the movie theatre giant, which is contesting the decision from the Competition Tribunal.

Other recent Competition Bureau targets for drip pricing have included SiriusXM Canada, Discount Car & Truck Rentals Ltd., TicketNetwork and Canada's Wonderland.

The bureau said the cases amounted to public warnings that DoorDash ignored, making it unlikely the company would cease its behaviour unless the watchdog went after the business for making "false or misleading representations."

It's fight against the business, which is headquartered in San Francisco and entered the 好色tv market in November 2015, was framed as a way to bring clarity to consumers.

"When consumers go online to order, they expect these services to deliver not just food, but also honest pricing," the bureau said in its application.

"Consumers expect that the price they see advertised will match what they ultimately pay."

Several examples the watchdog provided the tribunal show those expectations aren't always met.聽

In one instance, a Greek restaurant in B.C. is shown to be selling souvlaki for $26, but the bureau says it can鈥檛 be purchased without paying obligatory fees, including a 99 cent fee for orders made in the province, a $2.99 delivery fee and a fixed fee of $1.99 for the food having to travel outside the eatery鈥檚 usual zone. Also added to the order are taxes and other additional service fees.

Other examples the bureau provided show a similar process playing out through DoorDash, when an order is made for Korean fried chicken from a Quebec shop and when Doritos, Pringles, a Mars chocolate bar and Sour Patch Kids Bunnies were bought from Dollarama.

This report by 好色tvwas first published June 9, 2025.