Not every price reduction means real savings—and not every promotion is as attractive as marketing messages suggest. Poland’s competition and consumer watchdog, Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK), has issued two decisions finding that customers of Zalando and Temu were not properly informed about price reductions. The total amount of fines imposed came to nearly PLN 37 million.
The lowest price from the last 30 days: an obligation, not an option
At the heart of the cases is the obligation to inform consumers about the lowest price applied in the 30 days preceding a discount, introduced into Polish law in 2023 following the implementation of the so-called Omnibus Directive. This figure is intended to be the primary reference point for assessing the real scale of a discount.
As emphasized by Tomasz Chróstny, President of UOKiK, traders are required to present promotions reliably—regardless of the sales channel or advertising format. Manipulating reference prices or presenting them selectively infringes collective consumer interests and will result in sanctions.
Zalando: missing information and manipulation of the reference point
In Zalando’s case, UOKiK found that for a long period customers using the Polish version of the service did not have access to information about the lowest price from the previous 30 days—neither on product pages nor in external advertisements. Even after the company began displaying this information, it did so unreliably.
The authority identified repeated instances where the “lowest price” was modified without any actual change in the sales price, artificially inflating the apparent size of discounts. In addition, Zalando calculated percentage reductions against “initial” or “regular” prices rather than the legally required lowest price from the previous 30 days, making promotions appear more attractive than they really were.
For two practices infringing collective consumer interests, the President of UOKiK imposed a fine of PLN 30,945,000 on Zalando SE, headquartered in Berlin. The decision is not final and may be appealed. Separately, UOKiK is conducting another proceeding against Zalando for failure to provide requested information.
Temu: inconsistent and incorrect promotion data
Irregularities were also found on the Temu platform, operated in the EU by Whaleco Technology Limited, headquartered in Dublin. An analysis of the website and mobile app showed that information about the lowest price from the previous 30 days was not always provided—and when it was, it was sometimes inaccurate or inconsistent.
UOKiK identified, among others, situations in which:
- the sales price changed, but the “lowest price from the last 30 days” was incorrect;
- both prices changed, yet incorrect data continued to be displayed;
- the sales price remained unchanged, while the purported lowest 30-day price changed from one day to the next.
During the proceedings, Temu ceased the questioned practices and standardized the way promotions were presented. Nevertheless, the President of UOKiK imposed a fine of PLN 5,910,900. This decision is also not final.
Why this matters for consumers
As studies by UOKiK and the European Commission show, consumers largely trust percentage discount labels and often do not verify their basis. The so-called anchoring effect means that a high percentage reduction is automatically perceived as a real benefit—even if it is calculated from an inflated or fictitious reference price.
That is why information about the lowest price from the previous 30 days is crucial for making informed purchasing decisions.
Inspections continue
The President of UOKiK has announced further inspections in both e-commerce and brick-and-mortar retail. Ongoing proceedings involve, among others, Media Markt, Sephora, Glovo, Shell Polska, AzaGroup (Renee and Born2Be), and Jeronimo Martins Polska. The authority has also issued more than 70 so-called “soft notices”, advising businesses on how to correctly label promotions.
As UOKiK stresses, promotions are a legitimate sales strategy—but they come with specific legal obligations. Ignoring them can prove costly.
Source: ceo.com.pl
