A customer asks about an offer, orders a service and then checks whether they can cancel it. The seller may not realise that they are dealing with an inspector from Poland’s Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK). Government proposal UC142 would expand the authority’s ability to investigate businesses under an assumed identity. For businesses, this means reviewing how customer service works in practice.
Mystery shopping is already in use
The existing mechanism is based on Article 105ia of the Polish Act on Competition and Consumer Protection. It allows inspectors to take steps aimed at purchasing goods to obtain evidence of practices that infringe consumers’ collective interests. Inspectors do not disclose their official role at the outset. They present their official identification, inspection authorisation and the court’s consent immediately after completing those steps.
The activities may be recorded using audio or video equipment without notifying the business in advance. Both undertaking the activities and recording them in this way require the consent of the Court of Competition and Consumer Protection. The court must decide within 48 hours, and the Act does not provide for an appeal against that decision. [1]
What proposal UC142 would introduce
The proposed changes would allow inspectors to actually purchase goods and services through controlled purchases, including under an assumed identity. According to the government’s description of the proposal, an inspector could use an assumed first name, surname and residential address, as well as a non-official email address. The identity details would be selected randomly from a database maintained by the President of UOKiK.
Purchasing goods or services would also allow evidence to be gathered after a contract has been concluded—for example, by checking whether a business respects the right to withdraw from a distance contract. The proposal also envisages examining and testing products. These measures are intended to implement Regulation (EU) 2017/2394, known as the Consumer Protection Cooperation (CPC) Regulation. [2]
What an inspection could look like
One possible scenario would involve ordering a product from an online shop, receiving the parcel and exercising the right of withdrawal. This would allow the inspector to establish whether the seller accepts the withdrawal notice and how it handles the refund. This is an illustration of the proposed mechanism, rather than an account of an actual inspection.
Messages sent after the purchase, the handling of customer requests and the charges actually imposed could therefore become relevant to the assessment of a business’s conduct. Compliance would need to be checked against both the business’s documents and its employees’ everyday practices.
What businesses should review
A practical review should start with checking that information in advertisements, offers and contracts is consistent. Businesses should then check whether staff can clearly explain prices, additional charges and the rules for ending a contract. After-sales service deserves the same attention: the content of replies, records of customer requests and the way consumers’ rights are respected in practice.
Website blocking and domain removal
The proposal would also expand the powers of the President of UOKiK in relation to businesses operating online. It aims to enable the use of measures provided for in Article 9(4)(g) of the CPC Regulation: removing content, restricting access to a website or application, and ordering the prominent display of a warning to consumers accessing it. [2]
Orders could also be addressed to hosting service providers and require them to remove or disable an online interface, or restrict access to it. Where appropriate, domain registries or registrars could also be ordered to delete a fully qualified domain name (FQDN) and allow the competent authority to register it. [3]
These measures are a last resort. Their use requires the absence of other effective means of bringing about the cessation or prohibition of an infringement covered by the Regulation, and the need to prevent the risk of serious harm to consumers’ collective interests. The proposed provisions are therefore intended to enable decisive action against online infringements, subject to these conditions. [3]
The proposal is still a proposal
These changes should not be presented as legislation already in force. The government’s UC142 entry identifies the fourth quarter of 2026 as the planned date for adoption of the bill by the Council of Ministers. That timetable does not establish when—or whether—the legislation will be enacted or enter into force. The details of the future procedure will need to be assessed against the final legislative text. [2]
Sources
[1] Polish Act of 16 February 2007 on Competition and Consumer Protection, Article 105ia: Consolidated text (in Polish).
[2] Chancellery of the Prime Minister, government legislative proposal UC142: Government proposal (in Polish).
[3] Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2017 (CPC Regulation), Article 9(4)(g): EUR-Lex — text of the Regulation.