ripoff

IT’S supposed to be the most wonderful time of the year – until you spend £250 on a beauty advent calendar that leaves you feeling ripped off.

While most mere mortals won’t get their hands on P. Louise’s latest extravagant design until November, a large number of beauty enthusiasts have ripped theirs open and revealed everything inside it. Spoiler alert – I don’t think it’s worth the cash.

And in a crushing blow to entrepreneur Paige Louise Williams, the general consensus seems to be that her old rival Made By Mitchell – founded by Mitchell Halliday – has a much better offering this year, which I’m told has fuelled their old feud. 

My insider said: “Everyone knows beauty advent calendars are big business these days and it means a lot to brands like P. Louise and Mitchell that the fans like them.

“To see people slating her creation is tough, but knowing many prefer Mitchell’s is a hard pill to swallow. 

“If anything it will make her even more determined to come out on top next year.”

Known for her extravagant packaging and bold makeup, P. Louise What Glows Around Advent Calendar is a massive pink and gold light-up carousel featuring 25 doors of full-size products. 

But the lavish box comes with a hefty price tag of £250, with the brand claiming it’s full of products valued at £500.

In comparison, the Harrod’s beauty advent calendar is £225, but with contents worth over £1k, Fortnum & Mason Beauty Advent Calendar retails for £275, but claims to be worth over £1,225 and the No7 The Ultimate Beauty Advent Calendar, comes in at £170 and is worth £550.

Made By Mitchell’s version – called the Apres Ski – is priced at £99 and states that everything included is a brand new product, which makes it difficult to value. 

Fans have the option to pay both upfront or in instalments for the P. Louise version, which promises to offer new formulas, flavours and shades made just for Christmas. 

If you don’t have £250 lying around, you can pay £25 today and then pay the rest interest free over the next month. 

But as unboxing videos flood TikTok, some viewers have been left distinctly underwhelmed. Many consumers feel the calendar is bloated with skincare items rather than makeup the brand is famous for. 

Others are questioning the curation of the products altogether.

One person raged: “I think this year’s is the worst. The products do look good, don’t get me wrong, but she should have two different ones now or at least do a proper 50/50 mix of skincare and make-up. For the price I feel like you could get a higher end skincare advent calendar instead.”

One creator was disappointed after a piece broke off her box before she could properly open it. Another declared it “felt like rip off.”

After watching clips online, lots have vowed to cancel their order, with one person commenting: “I’m gutted I’m going to cancel my order. I don’t want boring skincare and a few pieces of generic makeup like mascara and a neutral eyeshadow palette.”

Another frustrated fan questioned the contents, asking: “Is she just putting the stuff that’s not selling in there?”

Have you ordered P Louise’s advent? Let me know what you think fay.leyfield@thesun.co.uk

Whenever P. Louise faces criticism, another name is rarely far behind: Made By Mitchell.

Mitchell Halliday‘s wildly successful beauty brand has also been heavily promoting its own holiday calendar. 

And according to many beauty enthusiasts watching the drama unfold, Mitchell has completely outshone his former friend this season.

“Honestly I think this one (P. Louise) is so disappointing compared to other years,” one user noted. “I feel Made by Mitchell have definitely taken the advent crown between the two brands this year.”

Another commented: “I would be disappointed if I paid for this advent calendar this year. I think Made by Mitchell are getting it right. Packaging still on point but the right level of products etc.”

It’s certainly not the first time TikTok Shop juggernauts Paige and Mitchell Halliday have been pitted against each other.

Indeed, the pair have a long history before things went awry. 

Mitchell was a star make-up artist and instructor at the P. Louise Makeup Academy and the two frequently collaborated, dominating the UK glam scene together. 

However, as Mitchell’s star rose and he eventually branched out to launch his own brand, Made By Mitchell, their close relationship fractured.

Things came to head when they collaborated on a product together in 2019 – the now iconic Paints. 

Mitchell claims his name was removed from the product, which led him to make the decision to go it alone. Paige has not publicly commented on the situation.

He admitted the pair no longer speak at all, despite once being so close. 

But the split certainly didn’t seem to harm either of them, who have gone on to be really successful.

Paige started out in life with humble beginnings on a council estate but is now amassing a huge net worth of £100 million thanks to her overnight success online. 

We reported how last year alone, Paige raked in a whopping £71.3 million for her cosmetics.

The 31-year-old founded the P. Louise Make-up Academy and salon back in 2014 in Manchester before expanding to produce her own cosmetics line.

She was able to kickstart her passion project with a £20,000 loan from her grandmother and is now reaping the rewards for her tenacity.

In 2024, the brand broke records by making £1.5m in 12 hours while promoting the beauty products on a TikTok Shop Live. 

It’s been an extraordinary journey but not without its controversies.

Last Christmas her Pinkmas event was cancelled after issues with the licensing process.

The event was supposed to run from December 1 to January 4 and was meant to include attractions including a pink ice skating rink and a pantomime performance.

Tickets had been priced at £60 for off peak times and £80 for peak times – leaving fans gutted it didn’t take place. 

But as Pinkmas showed, a bump in the road – or a backlash on TikTok – rarely keeps Paige down for long. 

While Mitchell may have snatched the advent crown this year, we imagine Paige is already plotting her payback for next year.

PARENTS will no longer be stung with rip-off fees just to sit next to their children on flights.

Airlines will be forced to seat under 14s beside a mum, dad or an accompanying adult for free.

It could save families up to £104 on a return trip.

Passengers will also be able to fix simple spelling mistakes on bookings without being hit with charges of up to £40.

PM Andy Burnham said: “People are fed up with these little charges that add up.

“So I’m putting a stop to them.”

TAKING FLIGHT

Europe’s best airlines have been revealed and it isn’t good news for UK ones

‘UNSAFE’

Flights axed as Ukraine warns of ‘drone-infested skies’ leaving thousands stranded

“This is what our everyday fixes are all about.

“Giving people room to breathe by tackling the small irritations that catch people out.

“They waste their time and cost them money.”

Ministers are also drawing up a system to help airlines identify repeat troublemakers.

It comes after more than 1,000 serious disruptive incidents were logged last year.

It could make it easier to extend bans on passengers who repeatedly cause issues.

Holidaymakers will also be given greater flexibility to correct simple name errors including spelling mistakes on bookings for free – rather than facing charges

Rip-off airline charges including hidden fees for parents to sit next to children under 14 will be banned under government plans.

Holidaymakers will also be given greater flexibility to correct simple name errors including spelling mistakes on bookings for free – rather than facing charges.

Under the proposals unveiled today, airlines will be required to seat children under the age of 14 with a parent or adult accompanying them free of charge.

Andy Burnham said: “Charging parents just to sit with their children is a rip-off, plain and simple. And being hit with a hefty fee for a simple spelling mistake on a booking form isn’t right either.

“People are fed up with these little charges that add up, so I’m putting a stop to them. This is what our everyday fixes are all about. Giving people room to breathe by tackling the small irritations that catch people out, waste their time and cost them money.”

Earlier this year the Competition Markets Authority (CMA) investigated budget airline Ryanair over such charges costing around £8 each way.

Under the airline’s old policy parents had to book a “mandatory family seat” to sit with their children aged 2-11 in order to secure a seat when they flew.

But Ryanair – which the CMA said was the only major operator to charge such a fee – changed its policy in June with kids up to the age of 11 seated next to their parents free of charge.

It’s website now states: “For safety reasons, children aged between 2 and 11 years must sit next to an accompanying adult, and infants (8 days to 23 months inclusive) must sit on an accompanying adult’s lap. Families may choose either to reserve seats or select free random allocation.

“If random allocation is selected, children will be seated next to an accompanying adult on the same reservation free of charge. Other adults and teens on the booking may be allocated seats separately.”

The government said that while some airlines already offer protections on fees, the reforms will guarantee the same rights for passengers – despite who they fly with.

British Airways policy already makes clear children up to the age of 12 will be seated for free. It states: “To ensure your family has the best seats when you fly, we recommend choosing yours in advance when you book. There may be an additional fee for this.

“If you don’t choose your seats in advance, we always do our best to seat your family together based on flight seat availability. This may mean that you’ll be seated in adjacent rows or across the aisle. All children under 12 will be seated with an accompanying adult.”

EasyJet’s policy adds:”If you leave it to the last minute it’s possible that there may not be enough seats left for us to seat your family next to each other.

“We’ll still make sure each child under 12 is seated close to an adult on your booking. However we may only be able to arrange this at the airport or on board, which can cause delays for you and other passengers, and not everyone may be seated together.”

The government said the move was the latest in the PM’s attempts to give people breathing space, including action already unveiled on costly subscription traps and school uniform rip-offs.

Heidi Alexander, Transport Secretary, said: “Parents should not have to feel the pinch just to sit next to their child on a flight, or for amending a simple booking error. That’s why we’re scrapping these unnecessary charges for all airlines – another everyday fix to help put money back in people’s pockets and give households more breathing room.

“And everyone deserves to travel knowing their flight isn’t going to be disrupted by bad behaviour from a small minority. These common-sense reforms will make flying safer for staff and passengers and protect people from unnecessary charges, whoever they fly with.”

Rory Boland, Editor of Which? Travel, added: “It’s clearly unfair to force parents and children as young as three to pay an extra fee just to sit together. Airlines that have separated families are putting profit ahead of passenger peace of mind.

“Which? has successfully pressured many airlines into dropping these fees over the past ten years. So it’s welcome to see the government taking firm action on this by outlawing these charges completely and finally putting an end to this rip off.

“It is also positive to see greater flexibility to amend simple mistakes, protecting consumers from unnecessary charges.”