In connection with a series of consumer complaints and violation of several information obligations in the provision of telecommunications services, the President of the Office of Electronic Communications imposed a fine in the amount of PLN 350,000 on Vectra S.A.
The decision of the President of UKE on the imposition of the penalty was issued in connection with the results of the previous audit in the Company. In the proceedings, the President of UKE analysed extensive body of evidence including copies of agreements and amendments to agreements for the provision of publicly available telecommunications services concluded with users and the documentation of complaint procedures maintained by the Company.
The analysis of the documentation conducted by UKE revealed numerous violations of the Telecommunications Act and provisions of the Regulation of the Minister of Infrastructure of 1 October 2004 on the complaint procedure and conditions to be met by the complaint about telecommunications services (Journal of Laws No. 226, item 2291, hereinafter the "Regulation") with respect to compliance by the Company with information obligations in relation to end users.. The audit included the analysis of the provisions of the agreements and amendments. Irregularities were revealed in the majority of agreements subject to audit.
The analysis of the evidence collected by UKE during administrative proceedings to impose a penalty demonstrated clearly that Vectra S.A. failed to comply with the obligations within the scope of several categories of cases, by violating:
- the obligation to specify the type of provided services in agreements for the provision of telecommunications services,
- the obligation to specify the scope of maintenance service in agreements for the provision of telecommunications services,
- the obligation to specify in agreements for the provision of telecommunications services:
- the scope of publicly available telecommunications services provided, with the specification of elements composing the subscription fee,
- the data on the quality of services, the scope of the responsibility for non-performance or improper performance of the agreement,
- the amount of compensation and the principles and dates of its payment, dates for lodging and considering complaints,
- the method of obtaining information on the costs of maintenance services,
- the obligation of specifying in the agreements for the provision of connection to the public telecommunications network of a number assigned to the subscriber, the obligation to include in a written confirmation of the fact of making declaration on changes to the terms and conditions of the agreement the information on the scope and date of changes introduced, the obligation to publish current information on the quality of publicly available telecommunications services,
- the obligation of a written confirmation of acceptance of the complaint within the time limit, by exceeding that date by 22 days and by 16 days the obligation to provide a written reply to the complaint within the time limit, by exceeding the time limit by 6 days and by 55 days the obligation to determine in the written reply to the complaint the amount of the return of another debt,
- the obligation to include in the written reply to the complaint information that the means of complaint have been exhausted and on the right to pursue claims in court, and in addition, in the case when the complainer is the consumer, on the right to pursue claims by way of proceedings referred to in Article 109 and 110 of the Telecommunications Act,
- the obligation to include in the reply to the complaint the factual justification in case of refusal to recognise the complaint in full or in part - due to the fact that the factual justification did not relate to the subject.
In determining the amount of the fine, the President of UKE took into account the current activities of Vectra S.A., the scope of violation and financial capabilities of the sanctioned entity. The President of UKE found that the penalty in the amount determined is justified, appropriate to the violations identified and performs its basic functions: repressive, preventive and disciplinary.