• President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK), Tomasz Chróstny, has issued three decisions concerning Getin Noble Bank, questioning the manner of offering GetBack bonds, the use of prohibited clauses and unilateral amendment of agreements.
• Has a Getin Noble Bank advisor solicited you to purchase the GetBack bonds? Following the decision of the President of UOKiK you are entitled to a compensation of PLN 20 thousand.

President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection Tomasz Chróstny issued 3 decisions against Getin Noble Bank (GNB). They pertain to the recognition of amendment clauses as prohibited contractual provisions, unilateral amendment of mortgage loan agreements and misleading in offering GetBack bonds. The decisions of the President of UOKiK enable injured consumers to pursue their claims in court. Once the decisions are legally binding, they will become a prejudicial ruling. This means that the findings of the President of the Office concerning entrepreneur’s practices that infringe collective consumer interests or use of prohibited clause are binding upon courts.

In its investigation, the Office also verified whether and how Getin Noble Bank settled accounts with individuals who had already repaid consumer loan. As a result of the UOKiK's efforts, the entrepreneur has changed the settlement method to a linear method that is more beneficial to consumers.

First decision – unilateral amendment in mortgage loan agreements

The President of UOKiK concluded that Getin Noble Bank misled its customers when communicating amendments to the provisions of mortgage loan agreements, including those indexed to the Swiss franc. In 2016, the bank's customers received letters informing them that - as of the new year - the bank was going to clarify the method of calculating foreign currency exchange rates. In addition, it superseded the provisions on the Bank Enforcement Title (BTE) with provisions on a possible obligation to issue a declaration of submission to execution on the plea of art. 777 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which could entail the conclusion of a notarial deed and would facilitate the bank's future claims. This was related to the revocation of the BTE by the Constitutional Tribunal; however, this judgment does not empower the bank to include other forms of collaterals in the agreements. The Office contested such actions.

“A mortgage loan agreement is an agreement concluded for a specific, multi-annual period. It is forbidden to change its essential terms and conditions arbitrarily, and these are the provisions on the principles of calculating exchange rates or other collaterals. Any new measure should result from bilateral agreements. If the customer would not agree to them, the agreement should be performed under the existing conditions, says Tomasz Chróstny, the President of UOKiK. As a result of GNB's actions, a number of people had to accept the new conditions, otherwise the bank would have terminated the agreement and would have required repayment of the entire loan.

For the violation of collective consumer interests, President of UOKiK Tomasz Chróstny imposed a financial penalty on Getin Noble Bank in the total amount of over PLN 7 million (PLN 7,019,640.00) Pursuant to the decision of the President of UOKIK, consumers will receive letters from the bank informing them about the contested practices. The decision is not yet final.

Second decision – prohibited provisions

The President of UOKiK found prohibited the provisions contained in the template agreements concerning, inter alia, the issuance of payment cards, granting loans and running accounts. Getin Noble Bank granted itself the right to introduce some unclear amendments thereto, e.g. when regulations change, court judgements are issued, or when typographical errors are corrected. At the same time, GNB reserved the right to change the tariff of fees and commissions for the above reasons, and was able to do so due to the new tariffs for energy, postal and telecommunications services. In the UOKiK's opinion, these are too vague provisions, which may be used as an excuse for the bank to introduce arbitrary amendments. The entrepreneur does not specify precisely the factors that will affect the modification of the rules and regulations and the extent of these modifications. As a result, the consumer is not able to predict what kind of changes they may expect during the term of the agreement. At the same time, this may result in the bank unilaterally replacing abusive provisions with other provisions, which is forbidden under the CJEU case law.

President of UOKiK Tomasz Chróstny recognized the provisions as prohibited and prohibited their use. The bank is obliged to send letters to consumers informing them of the decision itself and on the resulting consequences for them. This may mean that it is not possible to unilaterally change the terms and conditions of the agreement in the future and that customers may question the modifications made so far. The decision is not yet final.

Third decision – Getin Noble Bank and GetBack

President of UOKiK Tomasz Chróstny recognized that GNB was misleading consumers when offering corporate bonds issued by GetBack company. While GNB would inform that the investment was secure and the profit was guaranteed, it was not the case. Moreover, the bank offered the purchase of these bonds to individuals who were not likely to risk - they were interested in regular term deposits. The entrepreneur therefore offered products that did not meet its customers' needs. - UOKiK received numerous complaints from consumers about Getin Noble Bank's advisors, which proved that there were irregularities during the sales process. Corporate bonds are not a safe investment, as their safety depends solely on the financial condition of the issuer and its business decisions. They are not covered by the guarantees of the competent institutions. The Bank, as a public trust institution, should have ensured that it provided clear and comprehensive information about the product profile, in particular about the related risks, while taking into account consumers' actual needs. This is the seventh decision regarding the offering and sale of GetBack bonds, concluding our actions in the GetBack case – says Tomasz Chróstny, the President of UOKiK.

The President of UOKiK ordered Getin Noble Bank to pay compensation to consumers who purchased GetBack bonds with its agency. It will be PLN 20 thousand. The bank will identify the consumers eligible for compensation in a separate communication. Details are now available in the decision. This  settlement is not yet final.

GetBack –  actions of the President of UOKiK

UOKiK took the first steps to protect individuals aggrieved by the actions of GetBack or the entities offering its financial products even before complaints from consumers had been received. In late April 2018, following media reports, the Office opened an preliminary proceeding and conducted audits to determine the rules for offering and selling GetBack corporate bonds. Soon after, UOKIK has drawn up a consumer guide with detailed instructions on how to file complaints and where to seek legal assistance.

To date, the President of UOKiK has issued 7 decisions concerning GetBack and other entities that participated in offering consumers corporate bonds issued by this company (including the decision regarding Getin Noble Bank described in the communication):

• February 2019: over PLN 2 million penalty for Polski Dom Maklerski [Polish Brokerage House] for a prohibited clause used in the subscription for GetBack corporate bonds, which could discourage them from pursuing their claims,
• August 2019: partial decision regarding Idea Bank – establishing the fact of misleading consumers when offering GetBack bonds,
• February 2020: decision regarding Idea Bank - establishing the fact of misselling during the offering of GetBack bonds and an order to pay PLN 10 thousand in compensation to consumers,
• April 2020: decision regarding GetBack company – establishing the fact of misleading consumers when offering corporate bonds,
• July 2020: identification of unfair practices while offering by Idea Bank investment certificates of Lartiq funds (formerly Trigon) guaranteed by GetBack and an order to pay PLN 38 thousand in compensation to consumers,
• July 2020: PLN 7.2 million penalty for Lartiq company (formely Trigon) for misleading consumers when offering investment funds guaranteed by GetBack.

Moreover, UOKiK supports consumers in individual litigation cases by issuing reasoned opinions on issues concerning irregularities in the offering of GetBack bonds. We recommend submitting requests to issue a reasoned opinion on the case to support civil claims.

A reasoned opinion in a given case is a written opinion of the President of UOKiK in which it presents its arguments and views which are relevant to a given dispute pending before a court of law. A reasoned opinion may pertain to any case which a consumer is a party to.

In order to obtain a reasoned opinion you must apply in writing to UOKiK. Make sure to:

• Provide information about the parties to the proceedings, the case reference number, the court that is considering your case and the date of the hearing.
• Indicate which issues should be the subject of analysis and the opinion of UOKiK.
• Attach all documents submitted in the course of proceedings, e.g. judgments, orders and dispositions issued by the courts.
• Keep UOKiK informed about the current course of proceedings - e.g. pleadings, new hearing date.

Consumer support:

Phone: +48 801 440 220 or +48 22 290 89 16 – consumer helpline
e-mail: [SCODE]cG9yYWR5QGRsYWtvbnN1bWVudG93LnBs[ECODE]
Consumer ombudsmen – in your town or district

Additional information for the media:

UOKiK Press Office
Pl. Powstańców Warszawy 1, 00-950 Warszawa, Poland
Phone +48 695 902 088, +48 22 55 60 246
E-mail: [SCODE]Yml1cm9wcmFzb3dlQHVva2lrLmdvdi5wbA==[ECODE]
Twitter: @UOKiKgovPL