• President of UOKiK Tomasz Chróstny has initiated proceedings to investigate how two food ordering applications – Glovo and Uber Eats – operate.
• Complaints indicate that the companies have, among other things, problems with order settlements – consumers are unable to obtain immediate overpayment refunds or money for unfulfilled orders.

UOKiK has received complaints from consumers about irregularities in ordering food and grocery items through popular apps. Consumers indicated, for example, that they would pay a higher price for their order than the one specified prior to placing their order. Complaints have also been made about how the companies settle unfulfilled orders. UOKiK President Tomasz Chróstny initiated proceedings for the infringement of the collective interests of consumers against Glovo and explanatory proceedings against Uber Eats. They are mobile apps that are used to order food from restaurants to be delivered to an indicated address.

"We are noticing a rapid growth of online commerce platforms – food ordering apps are becoming increasingly common. Their popularity should be matched by high standards of consumer protection. This is why we are paying close attention to practices in use by such applications as well as monitoring consumer complaints. In the proceedings, we will verify how the food ordering applications operate. Consumer reports concern, for example, inaccurate information on price, on the basis of which consumers make their purchasing decision. Misleading consumers is unacceptable," said Tomasz Chróstny, the President of UOKiK.

Restaurant Partner Polska – Glovo – actual proceedings

Charges brought by the President of UOKiK include:

• Charging a higher fee despite being informed that a discount has been applied.

Consumers have complained to UOKiK about applying discounts. Upon order placement, the application informed them that the discount has been granted. But, ultimately, that was not the case. Instead, Glovo charged a higher price, and the consumers found out only after the payment had been collected. If Glovo customers had known before ordering that the discount would not be deducted, they might have chosen not to buy the products or buy less.

When responding to complaints, the company explained that the discount was not applied because the consumers did not meet the requirements, e.g. the data was entered on a different account in the app. In the opinion of the President of the Office, the company should verify this before order placement so that the consumer knows the final price.

• No information on order change.

Complaints indicate that whenever any grocery items ordered by the consumer with home delivery were out of stock, the order would be changed without prior consultation – customers were not informed of this. This made a big difference for people who wanted to use the discount – if the purchase did not reach a certain price, the discount did not apply, and sometimes the customer also had to pay extra for a low value of items in the shopping cart. If the customers had known this in advance, they could have opted out of purchasing through Glovo.

Excerpt from the company's chat with a consumer: 

"Consumer: Hello, I was placing an order worth PLN 60.04 in Biedronka and one product was out of stock and the first purchase code didn't apply.

Consultant: Hi Iga, I'm Kamil.

Consumer:I was trying to use a promo code that is valid until tomorrow. And I was charged PLN 62.95, so this must be some kind of misunderstanding.

Consultant: This amount results from the order price and a surcharge to reach the minimum shopping cart value.

Consumer: It is not my fault that something was out of stock and that the first purchase code didn't work.

Consultant: Due to the unavailability of products, the code could not be used and is still active, although only until tomorrow (...)"

• No refunds for undelivered products.

Consumers complained about being unable to recover their money from Glovo – when they paid twice for an order, when the order was not fulfilled or cancelled, or when the amount on the receipt was smaller than the price charged upon order placement (e.g. when some grocery items were not delivered because they were out of stock). According to regulations, the company should immediately settle with the consumer.

Proceedings for the infringement of the collective interests of consumers may result in a penalty of up to 10% of the turnover.

Uber Eats – explanatory proceedings

In their complaints about Uber Eats, consumers indicated that at the stage of food selection, they were unaware of any additional fee – it only appeared as they paid for their order. Other problems include failure to refund unfulfilled or cancelled orders and or disregarding discounts despite giving them at the stage of order placement. There are also complaints concerning issues with the complaint procedure – consumers claim that there are no responses to their letters and contact with the company is limited.

In the course of the explanatory proceedings, the President of UOKiK will check whether the situations described by consumers can be confirmed. The next step may be charging the company with the infringement of the collective interests of consumers. The sanction for the infringement of the collective interests of consumers can reach up to 10% of the turnover of the company for each infringing practice identified.

Consumer assistance:

Phone 801 440 220 or 22 290 89 16 – consumer helpline
Email: porady@dlakonsumentow.pl
Consumer Ombudsmen – in your city or county
Provincial Inspectors of Trade Inspection

Additional information for the media:

UOKiK Press Office
Pl. Powstańców Warszawy 1, 00-950 Warszawa, Poland
Phone +48 695 902 088, +48 22 55 60 246
E-mail: biuroprasowe@uokik.gov.pl
Twitter: @UOKiKgovPL