ARTICLE
24 February 2026

CMA Issues First Fine Under DMCCA 2024

GW
Gowling WLG

Contributor

Gowling WLG is an international law firm built on the belief that the best way to serve clients is to be in tune with their world, aligned with their opportunity and ambitious for their success. Our 1,400+ legal professionals and support teams apply in-depth sector expertise to understand and support our clients’ businesses.
Last year, key parts of the Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act came into force, and the Competition and Markets Authority received strengthened investigative and enforcement powers, enabling it to tackle consumer law breaches ...
United Kingdom Antitrust/Competition Law
Zoe Pearman’s articles from Gowling WLG are most popular:
  • within Antitrust/Competition Law topic(s)
  • with Senior Company Executives, HR and Finance and Tax Executives
  • in United Kingdom
  • with readers working within the Law Firm industries

Last year, key parts of the Digital Markets Competition and Consumers Act (DMCCA) came into force, and the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) received strengthened investigative and enforcement powers, enabling it to tackle consumer law breaches more efficiently and to impose far heavier penalties.

If you attended our ADVice seminar in January, you may recall that we mentioned we thought fines would become the norm and now, the CMA has issued its first fine – and a hefty one at that! We explore what this means and why is matters below.

CMA fine for failing to respond to a request for information

The CMA has imposed a fine on Euro Car Parks of £473,000 – this was for failing to respond to a request for information; the CMA has not fined Euro Car Parks for breaching consumer law.

This is important for several reasons:

  • It is the first fine under the CMA's new DMCCA powers and it is high! The CMA explains that the fine was set at 75% of the statutory maxima for these types of fines (being 1% of annual group turnover) to (a) reflect the seriousness of the breach; and (b) act as a deterrent. If this action is setting the tone and threshold for the CMA's enforcement action, we can expect more high fines for breaches...
  • In the accompanying press release the CMA was clear that Euro Car Parks was fined because it failed without reasonable excuse to respond to the CMA's request for information (an Information Notice).These Information Notices are important – if you have received an Information Notice from the CMA, this should not be ignored – this case confirms that doing nothing is not an option. You should take urgent action to ensure compliance, and individuals within the business should know to escalate this as a priority (and who to escalate this to!).
  • Euro Car Parks did not fail to respond to one Information Notice. The Information Notice was addressed to one of Euro Car Parks' directors and was sent in July 2025 by tracked post to the company's registered office, with a copy also hand-delivered to the company's registered office. The CMA followed up with an email in August 2025 that it sent to addresses it identified as belonging to Euro Car Parks, alerting the company to the fact the Initial Notice had been served, and that a response was required. The CMA followed up with another email in August 2025, and then subsequently with a letter in September 2025 (accompanied by another copy of the Information Notice), which was hand-delivered and sent by tracked post to the registered address, and also sent by email.
  • In October 2025, the CMA sent Euro Car Parks a provisional notice, which outlined the CMA's provisional conclusion that Euro Car Parks had failed to respond to the Information Notice, and the CMA's intention to fine Euro Car Parks. This prompted a response from Euro Car Parks, and it sought to justify its failure to respond:
    • In oral representations, it accepted the notice was lawfully served but noted the decision to not serve its Company Secretary or Managing Director delayed its response and differed from what it understood to be the CMA's normal practice.
    • It referred to a belief amongst certain of its officers that the CMA's email was fraudulent (in part, due to the tone and urgency of the message) and this resulted in the CMA email addresses being blocked, and other CMA correspondence being disregarded. This was not considered a reasonable excuse by the CMA. If you are concerned about possible cyber-security threats in connection with CMA correspondence, we recommend you contact the CMA separately – do not simply block CMA emails.
  • Euro Car Parks is one of the largest private parking firms in the UK. Parking was one of the sectors highlighted as being of particular concern when the CMA launched its 'major consumer protection drive'. We also note a reference by the CMA to "other parties" that responded to similar requests, so it clearly has concerns about potential consumer law breaches in this sector. Businesses operating in sectors highlighted by the CMA (incl. holidays, homeware retail, fashion) should take action to confirm their activities are compliant with current consumer law.
  • Euro Car Parks sought an injunction to prevent the CMA from naming it. This was rejected by the High Court on 11 February allowing the CMA to publish its enforcement notice imposing the fine.

Euro Car Parks has appealed the CMA's enforcement notice and the fine to the High Court. We note that the fine is not payable until this appeal is determined or withdrawn, unless the Court orders otherwise.

Read the original article on GowlingWLG.com

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

[View Source]

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More