• Have you renovated your bathroom and searched for cheaper products online? If you chose the Oltens brand, you overpaid.
• Online shops could only offer products at predetermined prices. If they sold them for less, they faced consequences.
• The President of UOKiK imposed financial penalties on Oltens 1 and two individuals managing the company for price fixing.

Oltens 1, a distributor of Oltens bathroom fixtures, imposed minimum resale prices on online shops for its products for at least several months. As a result, independent sellers could not compete on price, and consumers were unable to purchase cheaper products online. The system was meticulously supervised, and breaches of the agreement were punishable by warnings, exclusion from promotions, and even blocking access to the sales platform. The President of UOKiK issued a decision imposing financial penalties on the company and two of its managers.

When prices must be kept in line

Oltens 1 sold sanitary ware to other businesses, known as partners, who offered the products, among other channels, in online shops. The company’s price lists served a dual purpose: on the one hand, they specified purchase prices for contractors, and on the other, they included a column entitled ‘suggested net/gross retail price’, which in practice constituted the minimum price for online sales. In correspondence with one of its contractors, Oltens 1 explicitly stated that ‘the suggested prices are the minimum selling prices which online shops must offer’.

The mere indication of a suggested retail price is permitted, provided that sellers are completely free to set their own prices and do not suffer any consequences for offering lower prices. A breach of the law occurs only when such ‘suggested’ prices are in fact enforced as a mandatory minimum, as was the case with Oltens 1.

The company sought to standardise prices in brick-and-mortar and online shops and to prevent customers from encountering prices different from those displayed in traditional showrooms. As a result, consumers were deprived of one of the key benefits of online shopping – the possibility of purchasing the same product at a lower price.

– A suggested retail price may serve as a guideline, but it must not become a muzzle for sellers. If shops are threatened with a suspension of supplies or exclusion from promotions for lowering prices, this is no longer a suggestion but an illegal restriction of competition between independent businesses. It is simple – shops should be free to compete with each other on price, and consumers should have a choice and be able to buy cheaper – says Tomasz Chróstny, the President of UOKiK.

Wholesale under dictation, retail under control

In order to maintain top-down pricing, the company continuously monitored its partners’ online offers, using, among other tools, the Ceneo price comparison engine. If the analysis showed that a given shop was selling even one grosz below the price list, Oltens 1 sales representatives contacted the contractor and usually allowed a few days to “correct” the prices. Action was also taken when a seller offered free delivery, which was treated as a concealed reduction in the final price for the consumer. After repeated instances of non-compliance, the company suspended supplies or blocked the partner’s access to the purchasing platform, preventing them from checking stock levels and placing further orders. The ability to purchase products was restored only after prices had been increased to the level specified by the company. Partners who consistently applied the imposed prices were described as “disciplined” and were allowed to participate in promotional campaigns on the same terms as brick-and-mortar shops. For example, in an e-mail sent by Oltens 1’s sales director to sales representatives:

From 17 April, we are launching a promotional campaign for taps (…) with an additional 10% discount on the products specified in the attachment. Target group: OLTENS showrooms – plus ‘disciplined’ customers who, in addition to brick-and-mortar showrooms, also sell online. Note: customers who fail to comply with the sales policy will be blocked.

The President of UOKiK found that the company had infringed Polish and EU competition law by agreeing with its partners on minimum resale prices for Oltens sanitary ware sold online. Such an agreement restricted price competition between shops and deprived consumers of the opportunity to obtain genuinely lower prices.

Penalties imposed on the company and its managers

The maximum fines for participation in an anti-competitive agreement is 10 per cent of turnover for business entity and PLN 2 million for managers. Those severe penalties for participation in collusion can be avoided through the leniency scheme. It offers businesses involved in an illegal agreement and managers responsible for entering into a collusion arrangement an opportunity to reduce a sanction or, in some cases, avoid it altogether. It is intended for those who agree to cooperate with the President of UOKiK as a “crown witness” and provide evidence or information regarding the existence of a prohibited agreement.

In the Oltens 1 case, the President of UOKiK applied the leniency programme. As a result of the provision of relevant evidence and cooperation with UOKiK, the fines imposed on the company and two of its managers were reduced by 45 per cent. The company will pay PLN 256,300 instead of PLN 466,000, Ewa Wojciechowska – PLN 28,779, and Mariusz Biegański – PLN 37,001.

Have you noticed collusion on the market? Take action!

UOKiK runs a programme of acquiring information from anonymous whistle-blowers. Do you wish to inform us about competition restricting practices? Visit https://uokik.whiblo.pl/ or scan the QR code below and use the simple form. The system we use guarantees full anonymity, including from UOKiK.

We encourage those interested in the leniency scheme to contact the Office at a dedicated phone number: 22 55 60 555. UOKiK staff will answer any questions about the leniency programme, including anonymous ones.