Zamknij [x]
Korzystanie z witryny oznacza zgodę na wykorzystanie plików cookie z których niektóre mogą być już zapisane w folderze przeglądarki
Więcej informacji można znaleźć w Polityce prywatności i wykorzystywania plików cookies w serwisie

Uwaga! To jest strona archiwalna UOKiK. Aktualna strona znajduje się pod adresem: uokik.gov.pl

UOKiK - Urząd Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów

Powiększ czcionkęPomniejsz czcionkęWersja z wysokim kontrastemWersja tekstowaWersja tekstowaKanał RSSPobierz kod QREnglish version

Tu jesteś: Strona główna > Urząd > Informacje ogólne > Aktualności

Bank and communes punished for illegal practices

< poprzedni | następny > 13.09.2010

Bank and communes punished for illegal practices

Illegal practices applied by Raiffeisen Bank, using their market power by communes Tryńcza and Jabłonka – these are the latest decisions of the President of UOKiK issued in cooperation with the Branch Office in Kraków

The Branch Office in Kraków – the oldest of nine regional units of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection – investigates and eliminates market irregularities of Małopolskie and Podkarpackie Voivodeships. Not only undertakings and individuals who carry out economic activity are under the scrutiny of the Branch Office, but also chambers of commerce, schools, hotels and communes. Within ten years the Branch Office has issued 444 decisions protecting consumers and free market. In addition to local matters, UOKiK Branch Offices can issue nationwide decisions addressed at undertakings and consumers.

The latest decision drawn up by the Branch Office in Kraków questions some clauses included in the credit cards regulations applied by Raiffeisen Bank. The undertaking provided itself with a right of multiple charging its clients. The practice included the possibility of collecting charges for unspecified banking operations in the fixed amount (fee for handling a delayed payment). At the same time the bank reserves itself a right to charge for sending reminders and debt collection letters – these are also banking operations. The Office found that this is how the bank secured the possibility of multiple charging a consumer with default debt - by charging fees for a number of identical operations. According to the law, consumers should not be charged several times for the same operation. The clause questioned by the Office has already been included in the Register of Prohibited Clauses.

The President of UOKiK decided that Raiffeisen Bank breached collective consumer interests and imposed a fine in the amount of PLN 2,431,334. The bank has already amended the regulations and removed the questioned clause.

What is more, protecting competition on local markets, the Branch Office of UOKiK in Kraków, in response to consumers’ complaints, has recently carried out proceedings against communes Tryńcza and Jabłonka which used their position on the market of public utility services. The complaints were the stimulus for the Office to take actions.

After having carried out the antitrust proceedings, the President of UOKiK decided that Tryńcza commune (Podkarpackie Voivodeship) favoured the Municipal Budgetary Enterprise when performing connections to the sewage system. Citizens who had used services of the commune unit were not charged for issuing technical documents, while those who had chosen another contractor, had to pay additional costs of PLN 1,000. The practices applied by the commune impeded competition on the market. The President of UOKiK decided that Tryńcza commune abused its position and imposed a fine in the total amount of PLN 86,468. The commune has already ceased most of the questioned activities.

Similar breaches were made by Jabłonka commune (Małopolskie Voivodeship) on the market of sewage treatment. Citizens who delivered sewage to the treatment plant with septic tankers were charged the same amounts as persons using the sewage system. The price included both, transporting wastewater with the sewage system and its treatment. Fees were not diversified according to the manner of delivering the sewage. Because of this, persons who did not have sewage system paid twice - for the transport of waste with a septic tanker and – paying the fee – for transportation through the sewage system which did not actually take place. UOKiK has also questioned the conditions of linking to the sewage system. The possibility of connecting a property to the network was dependent on paying PLN 1,850 and the citizens had to perform some works at their expense. The conditions were onerous for consumers and brought the commune unjustified benefits. The President of UOKiK decided that Jabłonka commune abused its position and imposed a fine in the total amount of PLN 152,850. Moreover, the antitrust authority ordered to discontinue the illegal practices.

The decisions are not final, an appeal may be lodged against them to the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection.

Elimination of infringements on local markets is possible due to the extended structure of UOKiK, since nine Branch Offices, including one of the oldest – in Kraków, manage issues of competition protection. Only in 2009 the Branch Offices handled 277 cases concerning violation of collective consumer interest as well as 160 anti-trust cases. They issued 209 decisions regarding protection of weaker market participants and 101 on competition protection. Branch Offices carry out proceedings against undertakings operating in various industries: tourism, education, insurance or banking. More and more cases relate to the market of new technologies: access to the Internet, mobile telephony and numerous services provided through the Internet.

An increasing significance of this sector of economy is a challenge for the policy of competition and consumer protection. Therefore, these issues are the main topic of another event taking place on the occasion of 20 years of the Office activity. Today, the Branch Office in Kraków and the Jagiellonian University are organising the conference entitled "Competition protection on the new technologies markets". Representatives of the European Commission, entrepreneurs, experts and scientists will discuss about, inter alia, restrictions of competition on the markets of new technologies and impact of special economic zones on the development of innovative economy.

Additional information for the media:
Małgorzata Cieloch, Spokesperson for UOKiK
Department of International Relations and Communication
Pl. Powstańcow Warszawy 1, 00-950 Warszawa
Tel.:(+48 22) 827 28 92, 55 60 106, 55 60 430
faks (+48 22) 826 11 86
E-mail: malgorzata.cieloch@uokik.gov.pl

Branch Office of UOKiK in Kraków
Pl. Szczepański 5, 31-011 Kraków
Tel. (+48 12) 422 96 16, 421 75 79
faks (+48 12) 421 75 79, 421 74 98
E-mail: krakow@uokik.gov.pl

Pliki do pobrania

 

Warto przeczytać

PZPN i Ekstraklasa zmieniają praktyki
PZPN i Ekstraklasa zmieniają praktyki

Po interwencji Prezesa UOKiK, PZPN i  Ekstraklasa SA zmieniły swoje praktyki, które mogły stanowić nadużywanie pozycji dominującej.   ...>

Autocentrum AAA Auto - dwie decyzje Prezesa UOKiK
Autocentrum AAA Auto - dwie decyzje Prezesa UOKiK

Prezes UOKiK Tomasz Chróstny wydał dwie decyzje w sprawie AUTOCENTRUM AAA AUTO – łączna kara to ponad 72 mln zł. ...>

Tucz kontraktowy - dwie decyzje zobowiązujące
Tucz kontraktowy - dwie decyzje zobowiązujące

Po interwencji UOKiK poprawi się sytuacja producentów trzody chlewnej w systemie tuczu kontraktowego.   ...>

Nowe decyzje i postępowania Prezesa UOKiK w sprawie zatorów płatniczych
Nowe decyzje i postępowania Prezesa UOKiK w sprawie zatorów płatniczych

Prezes UOKiK Tomasz Chróstny nałożył kary w łącznej kwocie prawie 8 mln zł na spółki Volkswagen Poznań i Solaris Bus & Coach za tworzenie zatorów płatniczych.   ...>

Decyzja Prezesa UOKiK - kara dla CANAL+
Decyzja Prezesa UOKiK - kara dla CANAL+

Prezes UOKiK nałożył ponad 46 mln zł kary na CANAL+ Polska oraz nakazał zwrot środków konsumentom. ...>

Wakacje.pl - decyzja Prezesa UOKiK
Wakacje.pl - decyzja Prezesa UOKiK

Prezentowane na stronie wakacje.pl ceny wielu wycieczek były nieaktualne lub niepełne – inna cena pokazywała się w wyszukiwarce, a inna po rozwinięciu szczegółów oferty.   ...>

 

  
  

Do góry