Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Chapter 1, Article 4 Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, Chapter 2, Article 5

In the judgement, the court identified an unfair market practice linked with the conclusion of loan agreements.

By the decision of October 2, 2019, the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection found practices that violated collective consumer interests specified in Art. 24 sec. 1 and 2 point 3 of Competition and consumer protection act, actions of (...) sp. z o.o. based in Ł. The unfair practice was the proposing of loan agreements on terms providing for the obligation to establish a security for the loan in the form of a surety agreement within 3 days after the conclusion of the agreement, while the loan payment or continuation of the agreement is not dependent on the timely establishment of the abovementioned collateral, which results in granting loans to consumers despite the lack of collateral required by the entrepreneur himself, which makes it difficult for the consumer to correctly assess the proposed terms for being granted a loan, and thus may lead to a distortion of the market behaviour of an average consumer, which constitutes unfair market practices within the meaning of Art. 4 sec. 1 of the Act of 23 August 2007 on Counteracting Unfair Market Practices and violates the collective interests of consumers.

Should a soft obligation to establish a security of claims originating from a loan agreement be considered as an unfair market practice?

Proposing loan agreements on terms providing for the obligation to establish a security for the loan in the form of a surety agreement within 3 days after the conclusion of the agreement, while the loan payment or continuation of the agreement is not dependent on the timely establishment of the abovementioned security, which resulted in granting loans to consumers despite the lack of the collateral required by the entrepreneur himself, could hinder the correct assessment by the consumer of the proposed terms for being granted the loan, and thus could lead to a significant distortion of the market behaviour of the average consumer. Such practice constituted an unfair market practice within the meaning of Art. 4 sec. 1 of the Act on Counteracting Unfair Market Practices and thus infringes the collective interests of consumers.

URL: https://sip.lex.pl/orzeczenia-i-pisma-urzedowe/orzeczenia-sadow/xvii-ama-6-20-wyrok-sadu-ochrony-konkurencji-i-523368227

Pełny tekst: Pełny tekst

Brak wyników

Brak wyników

The Court confirmed the concerns of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection.