In recent years, the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority has moved from issuing guidance to active enforcement. High-street names across fashion, grocery, and travel have faced formal investigations, public undertakings, and significant reputational consequences. Understanding what went wrong — and why — is the clearest path to protecting your own business.
The Enforcement Landscape
From Guidance to Enforcement: What Changed
The CMA published the Green Claims Code in September 2021, giving businesses a clear set of expectations. But for many, the guidance was treated as optional — something to be considered eventually rather than acted on urgently. That complacency has proved costly.
Since 2022, the CMA has conducted sweeping reviews of sustainability claims across fashion, travel, and grocery. Its findings were stark: up to 40% of green claims reviewed showed potential breaches of consumer law. The response was a shift to active enforcement, with formal investigations launched against several of the UK’s most recognisable brands.
Critically, the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 gave the CMA direct enforcement powers — meaning it can now impose fines of up to 10% of global turnover without going through the courts. Enforcement timelines are significantly shorter, and the financial exposure is far greater than most businesses anticipated.
Real-World Cases
Notable Greenwashing Investigations
The CMA launched formal investigations into green claims made by these fast fashion retailers, including the use of “sustainable” product collections and eco-labels without sufficient substantiation. All three gave formal undertakings to change their practices — avoiding court but agreeing to binding compliance measures under ongoing CMA monitoring.
The CMA’s grocery sector review found concerns around “own-brand” sustainability claims and product-level eco-labelling. Several major supermarket chains were identified as needing to improve the quality and accessibility of substantiation for their environmental claims, particularly around packaging and sourcing.
Airlines and travel companies faced scrutiny over carbon offset claims and “carbon neutral” flight promotions. The CMA found that many claims were misleading about what “carbon neutral” actually meant in practice, and that offset schemes used were not sufficiently robust to justify the claims being made.
40%
of green claims reviewed by the CMA showed potential breaches
10%
of global turnover — max fine under new CMA direct enforcement powers
3
major retail sectors publicly investigated and named by the CMA since 2022
Common Mistakes
What Triggered Each Investigation
Across all the cases reviewed by the CMA, the same patterns emerge. These are not obscure technical failings — they are systemic issues that affect the majority of retailers who have not yet invested in formal compliance processes.
Vague Collection Labels
Products labelled as “conscious,” “eco,” or “sustainable” without any definition of what those terms mean or evidence of how the product qualifies.
Unverified Material Claims
Claims about recycled or organic content that could not be backed by certifications or supply chain documentation at the point of sale.
Misleading Offset Claims
Carbon neutral or net zero claims based on offset schemes that were either low-quality, expired, or not scientifically appropriate for the type of emissions being offset.
Selective Lifecycle Claims
Claims that highlighted one positive environmental attribute (such as recyclable packaging) while ignoring more significant negative impacts elsewhere in the product lifecycle.
The 5 Lessons Retailers Must Take from These Cases
Remove vague language immediately. Terms like “sustainable” and “eco-friendly” without substantiation are not just weak — they are legally risky under current UK consumer law.
Evidence must exist before the claim goes live, not be gathered in response to a challenge. The CMA’s standard is pre-existing, verified substantiation.
Third-party brand compliance is your problem too. If a non-compliant claim appears on your website or in your store, your business shares the liability.
Undertakings are not the end of the story. Businesses that give undertakings remain under CMA monitoring and can face contempt proceedings if they breach them.
The reputational cost often exceeds the legal cost. CMA investigations are publicised. The resulting media coverage can cause lasting consumer trust damage far beyond any fine.
What To Do
Protecting Your Business Going Forward
The CMA’s enforcement activity has made one thing clear: passive compliance is not enough. Businesses cannot simply avoid obviously false claims and consider themselves protected. The bar is higher — every claim must be substantiated, the substantiation must be accessible, and for multi-brand retailers, the same standard applies to every brand they carry.
The businesses navigating this landscape successfully are those that have moved to systematic, process-driven compliance — where green claims verification is embedded in the product-approval workflow rather than treated as a periodic audit exercise. That shift is not just about risk reduction; it is the foundation for making credible sustainability claims that actually build consumer trust.
Don’t Wait for an Investigation to Start Getting Compliant
Compare Ethics helps retailers automate green claims verification and close the compliance gaps before regulators find them.
Get Started Today
