08.02.2023

Fines imposed by the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) for delayed payments between entrepreneurs


Warning: Undefined variable $post_id in /home/platne/serwer14267/public_html/wp-content/themes/jlsw/single.php on line 31

Recently, the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) issued nine decisions related to cases of payment gridlock, including fines totalling almost one million zloty imposed on three entrepreneurs. The fines imposed were related to the implementation of the amended provisions of the Act on Counteracting Excessive Delays in Commercial Transactions, in force since 8 December 2022. The amendment introduced a new type of the act of unfair competition in the form of unjustified extending the payment dates for goods delivered or services performed, which may constitute e.g.: violation of the provisions of the Act on Counteracting Excessive Delays in Commercial Transactions. According to the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, the introduced changes will allow to increase the pressure on timely and fair settlements between large entrepreneurs and their counterparties. The Act grants specific powers to the President of the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK), including, in particular, the ability to impose administrative fines on entrepreneurs who use practices involving excessive delays in the payment of financial considerations. The intervention of the President of UOKiK will be possible in a situation where the value of financial considerations (remuneration for the delivery of goods or the performance of a service in a commercial transaction) not fulfilled and fulfilled after the due date by these entities in a period of three consecutive months amounts to at least PLN 2,000,000 – whereas a threshold of PLN 5,000,000 applies in 2020 and 2021. The fine will be imposed by the President of UOKiK in an amount equal to the sum of individual fines for each unfulfilled and delayed financial consideration that was due in the period covered by the proceedings, excluding financial considerations for which the due date for their fulfilment expired earlier than 2 years prior to the date of initiating the proceedings.

In the decisions referred to above, the President of the UOKiK ascertained excessive delays in the fulfilment of financial considerations by entrepreneurs. Each of the entrepreneurs on whom the fine was imposed had delayed payments to their counterparties in the amount exceeding PLN 5 million during the three months under investigation:

The first decision was issued to Agata company. In the course of the proceedings, it was established that the entrepreneur had been late with payment for more than 15,000 invoices to 797 counterparties. The largest sum of delayed payments to one of the entities amounted to almost PLN 5 million on account of 223 invoices. The President of UOKiK imposed a fine of over PLN 476,000 on that company.

The second fine of over PLN 280 000 was imposed on Bricoman Polska company. In the course of the proceedings, it was established that the entrepreneur had paid almost 14,000 financial considerations to counterparties past the due date. The largest amount of delays to one contractor exceeded PLN 1.2 million for 260 invoices paid after the due date.

The third fine of over PLN 200,000 was imposed on Silvan Transport & Logistics. The company failed to timely meet its financial obligations to more than 3,000 counterparties, with the largest delayed sum to a single entity amounting to more than PLN 1.2 million for 62 invoices paid late.

In the remaining six decisions, the President of the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) refrained from imposing a fine, as the Act provides that a fine should be waived if the entrepreneur in breach of the Act was itself a victim of payment gridlock in the period under investigation. Such situations occurred in case of the other six entrepreneurs, including IKEA. Therefore, although the entrepreneurs had also been creating payment gridlocks, no fine was imposed on them. Moreover, in the course of the proceedings concerning these entities, it was established that in the period under examination the sum of financial considerations these companies had received late was higher than the payment gridlock they generated.

Under the new powers, the President of the Office for Competition and Consumer Protection may also undertake so-called soft actions, addressing requests to entrepreneurs to change their payment practices. As a result, an entrepreneur receiving such a request will have the opportunity to immediately improve its payment practice towards its counterparties, thus avoiding proceedings and financial sanctions for generating payment gridlock.

You might be also interested in...