• President of UOKiK has imposed more than PN 46 million on CANAL+ Polska and ordered to refund monies to consumers.
• Consultants of the company were misleading clients about the purpose of a phone call.
• There were supposed to be package of channels while in fact the point was to sign a parallel agreement.

President of UOKiK, Tomasz Chróstny, issued the decision pertaining to CANAL+ Polska. Doubts were raised by sales phone calls in which it was suggested that consumer would receive a free gift while in fact the intention was to sign a parallel agreement. UOKIK received relevant consumers complaints.

In the course of the investigation, a few hundreds of sales talks were analysed
in which CANAL+ suggested its consumers to conclude a parallel agreement of which they were not aware until they had to start to pay for it. Doubts of President of UOKIK were raised by concealing the actual purpose of the phone call. CANAL+ consultants called its subscribers announcing the grant of an additional package or a free gift which in fact was a “bait” to conclude a new long-term agreement. Some consumers noticed additional fees and amendment to their agreement only after longer time.  During the first few months following a call with a consultant, the TV was made available free of charge. As the free-of-charge period came to an end, the consumer had no option to terminate the agreement and had to bear the costs of both agreements.

As President of UOKiK found, in order to induce the consumer to take the decision immediately, consultants pointed out that circumstances of the connection were exceptional (for example, that they contacted from the honours department) or informed about a limited number of packages. Moreover, during the talks, initial prices were overestimated, that is, the prices similar to the packages offered for new CANAL+ subscribers, as much as even by 50%. As a consequence, the offer presented during the phone call appeared more attractive than it really was.

- Consumers should have transparent and fair services provided by an entrepreneur which will let them conclude their agreement willfully. Developing sale talk scenarios in such a way that they conceal the actual purpose of the phone call between the seller and the customer as well as actual offer costs is prohibited. Let me emphasise that all key elements affecting a consumer decision must be open and presented fairly - says President of UOKiK, Tomasz Chróstny. 

For remote sales, fair information about the purpose of the contact at the beginning of the talk will allow the consumer to assess if they are interested in the offer at all or not.
A majority of the sales talk recordings analysed by UOKIK did not contain any information that the call was intended to conclude a new agreement. Instead, consumers could hear that the call was intended to grant an additional package of TV channels or an additional decoding device.

For the violation of collective consumer interests, President of UOKiK imposed a fine on CANAL+ Polska in the amount of over PLN 46 million (PLN 46,557,853). Moreover, President of UOKiK obligated CANAL+ Polska to refund monies to consumers who had concluded an agreement as part of the promotional campaign in the period from 10 October 2019 until 23 April 2022. Correspondingly, customers, who realised that they had been misled, terminated the agreement before the end of the effectuation period would receive the refund of the computed claim amount as soon as the decision would become final. On the other hand, all those who submitted a complaint would receive a refund of the fees paid for using the services. 

Details of the decision of President of UOKiK is to be sent by mail and e-mail to the customers aggrieved, they are to be published at www.canalplus.pl/ and in social media of CANAL+. The issued decision is not final and biding and the entrepreneur may appeal against to the court.

Consumer Support:

Phone: +48 801 440 220 or +48 222 66 76 76 – consumer helpline
E-mail: porady@dlakonsumentow.pl
Consumer Ombudsmen – in your town or district
Financial Ombudsman - after rejection of the complaint by the financial institution