• Home Broker, Orange Polska, Allegro.
• As for these enterprises, the court upheld the decision of UOKiK regarding the protection of consumers’ collective interests

Home Broker - file no XVII AmA 72/15

The first judgement follows the appeal of Home Broker against the decision of October 2015. The case concerns the sale of apartments in the 4 Kolory hotel in Władysławowo in the years 2011-2013. The Office found that consumers were misled by Home Broker about the certainty of investment returns. They were not informed about financial risk, and pressure was sustained on them to conclude contracts as soon as possible.

UOKIK imposed a fine of over PLN 330,000 for violation of consumers’ collective interests and demanded that the practice be discontinued.

In February 2019, the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection (SOKiK) dismissed the enterprise’s appeal. The court found that during the proceedings UOKiK clearly showed that Home Broker had kept back the developer’s financial problems and the related delays in the hotel construction from the buyers. The court agreed with the President of UOKiK that it is unethical and unprofessional to encourage people to buy a high-risk product. SOKiK stated there were no grounds to reduce the fine.

Orange Polska - file no XVII AmA 19/17

Another judgement concerns the appeal of Orange Polska against the decision of UOKiK of December 2016. Proceedings were initiated following complaints filed with the office from consumer ombudsmen and individuals using the company’s services.

The practice questioned by UOKiK consisted in automatic extension of contracts concluded for a fixed period if there was no action on the part of the consumer. In other words, if the client did not resign from the contract before its expiration, it was not terminated but extended for another period (6 months for Neostrada and 12 months or 24 months for other fixed services). Heavy fines were imposed on consumers who terminated their contracts before expiry.

In May 2014, the operator changed its practices, but even then, many consumers had difficulty choosing how to renew the contract because Orange consultants forced through the contract extension for a definite period of time.

The long-term nature and considerable extent of the practice affected the amount of fine imposed on the company. It amounted to nearly PLN 30 million.

In addition to the fine, the President of the Office decided that consumers should be compensated for the effects of the contested practice. UOKiK requested Orange Polska to refund former subscribers the fees for early termination of an automatically extended contract. The company also had to allow subscribers to terminate thus extended contracts without any consequences.

In October 2019, the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection dismissed the company's’ appeal, The court agreed with the charges and considered the fine imposed on Orange to fit the violations.

Allegro - file no XVII AmA 51/16

The third judgement concerns the appeal of Allegro against the UOKiK’s decision of February 2016. The company did not inform in its regulations about the rules of granting warnings to consumers and suspending their accounts should the sellers request a refund of commissions if a contract concluded through the auction site was not performed.

The President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection decided that Allegro’s practice violated consumers’ collective interests and ordered it to be discontinued. At the same time, the company was requested to publish, for a month, the decision of the office on its website www.allegro.pl.

In February 2019, the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection dismissed the enterprise’s appeal. In oral grounds for its decision, the court stressed that the conditions for running business must be transparent, and the practice contested by UOKiK is a violation of the Act on the Provision of Electronic Services. In addition, SOKiK decided that the imposition of an obligation to publish UOKIK’s decision was an adequate measure that would not cause excessive financial costs for the company.

Judgements and judicial decisions database

Since November 2015, the judgements and judicial decisions database has been made available on the UOKiK website. It contains information about all final decisions on competition-restricting practices, concentration control, violation of consumers’ collective interests, and decisions issued in proceeding for abusive clauses, in which the President of UOKiK was a claimant. The database is available in the ‘Judgements’ tab on the UOKiK website: http://decyzje.uokik.gov.pl/bp/wyroki.nsf. Terms and conditions governing the placement of judgements can be found in the following document: Principles governing the provision of information on court control over decisions made by the President of UOKiK.

Additional information for the media:

The UOKiK Press Office
Pl. Powstańców Warszawy 1, 00-950 Warsaw
Phone: 695 902 088, 22 55 60 345
E-mail: biuroprasowe@uokik.gov.pl
Twitter: @UOKiKgovPL