Poland’s competition and consumer authority has imposed a PLN 21.475 million penalty — approximately $5.5 million or €4.9 million — on renewable-energy installer Nasz Prąd after finding 21 prohibited provisions in contracts used with household customers.
The UOKiK decision announced on 7 October concerns contracts for heat pumps, pellet boilers, photovoltaic systems, energy storage and thermal-modernisation services. The regulator says some provisions allowed the company to alter equipment and prices after signing, impose substantial additional costs or transfer risks to the customer that should have remained with the professional installer.
The PLN 21.475 million decision was formally issued on 6 October 2026 as decision RŁO 2/2026 and announced publicly the following day. It is not final, and Nasz Prąd may challenge it in court.
Heat-pump specification could change after signing
One of the clauses challenged by UOKiK allowed Nasz Prąd to change the originally selected power rating of a heat pump after carrying out what the contract described as a detailed technical verification.
Changing the specification could also change the final price.
UOKiK’s concern was that the customer did not receive a guaranteed right to walk away from the transaction if those terms changed.
The regulator argues that an installer acting professionally should assess the property and select the appropriate equipment before concluding the contract. If later technical findings make a different device or price necessary, the consumer should be able either to accept the revised terms or leave the contract without adverse consequences.
PLN 1,000 for every day a property was not ready
Another clause concerned thermal-modernisation work.
If an installation team arrived and the property was considered unready for work, and the situation was not corrected within two hours, Nasz Prąd could charge the customer PLN 1,000 net for every day of delay associated with a return visit.
UOKiK said the accumulated charge could ultimately exceed the value of the underlying investment.
The contracts did not contain an equivalent sanction where the company itself failed to perform its obligations, and the regulator said customers were not given sufficiently precise information in advance about what condition the property needed to be in.
Customers could face removal costs after paying most of the price
UOKiK also challenged provisions covering customers who had not paid the full amount within 14 days of signing a final acceptance protocol for a heat pump or pellet boiler.
Under the contractual wording reviewed by the authority, Nasz Prąd could demand return of the equipment, remove the installation and charge the customer for installation, removal, unusable components and the loss in value between new and used equipment.
The company also excluded its responsibility for some damage resulting from the removal process.
UOKiK considered those consequences excessive, particularly because the regulator says customers could already have been required to pay 90% of the price before installation began.
UOKiK objected to roof risk being shifted to customers
The authority also rejected a provision under which a customer effectively confirmed that a roof could withstand the weight of a renewable-energy installation.
UOKiK said that clause transferred responsibility for possible damage — including serious structural damage caused by solar-panel loads — from the professional installer to the householder.
For companies operating in the residential energy sector, that is an important compliance point: technical suitability assessments cannot simply be converted into broad contractual declarations under which consumers assume risks that the installer is better placed to evaluate.
What a prohibited contractual clause means
UOKiK can examine standard-form consumer contracts and determine whether particular clauses are unfair.
The regulator’s guidance on prohibited clauses explains that terms which were not individually negotiated can be treated as abusive where they conflict with good practice and grossly prejudice the consumer’s interests.
Once a decision becomes final, a clause declared prohibited does not bind consumers who entered contracts using the affected standard terms.
The Nasz Prąd decision also contains remedial measures requiring the company, after the decision becomes final, to inform affected customers and publish information concerning the ruling on its website.
The PLN 21.5m penalty is not yet final
The distinction between an administrative decision and a final judgment matters.
UOKiK explicitly states that its ruling against Nasz Prąd is not legally final.
An appeal against a UOKiK decision is heard by the Warsaw Regional Court — Court of Competition and Consumer Protection, known as SOKiK. Under Poland’s civil procedure rules, an appeal is generally filed through the UOKiK president within one month of delivery of the decision.
The court can uphold, amend or overturn the regulator’s ruling. It can also, at the appellant’s request, suspend execution of a UOKiK decision while judicial review is under way.
No public statement from Nasz Prąd responding to the 7 October decision was identified in the company or media sources reviewed for this article.
Prosecutor notification is a separate matter
UOKiK is also investigating other complaints involving Nasz Prąd, but these should be kept legally separate from the PLN 21.475 million decision.
The authority says consumers continue to complain about issues including information provided about subsidies and investment financing, credit agreements, the way sales representatives identify themselves and difficulties withdrawing from contracts.
An explanatory proceeding is continuing to establish whether consumers may have been misled about who sales representatives were, why they were visiting, how investments would be financed and what withdrawal rights applied.
UOKiK has also notified prosecutors of a suspicion that an offence may have occurred in connection with the conclusion of contracts.
That referral is not a criminal charge, a prosecution or a finding that any offence has been committed. It places information before prosecutors for separate consideration.
Renewable-energy installers are already under scrutiny
The Nasz Prąd case forms part of wider UOKiK scrutiny of Poland’s residential renewable-energy market.
In March, the regulator announced more than PLN 7 million of penalties against other companies in the sector and said at the time that Nasz Prąd’s contractual templates were also being examined.
UOKiK has highlighted particular risks where households are making large purchases of solar panels or heat pumps using long-term credit, savings or financing linked to public support programmes.
That creates a business environment in which contract wording, sales procedures and financing explanations can carry substantial regulatory risk alongside the technical installation itself.
What installers should take from the decision
For companies selling heat pumps, photovoltaics and energy-efficiency upgrades, the decision highlights several practical compliance areas.
Technical checks should be carried out early enough for customers to understand what equipment they are buying and the actual price before becoming locked into a contract.
Charges for delays, missed appointments and payment problems need to be transparent and proportionate.
Terms should not allow an installer to shift broad technical or structural risks onto a householder where the company is the professional party assessing and delivering the installation.
And where a sale is connected with finance or subsidies, information given by sales staff needs to make clear what is guaranteed, what depends on third-party approval and what rights the consumer has to withdraw.
Fine worth about $5.5m
The exact administrative penalty imposed by UOKiK is PLN 21,475,000.
Using the National Bank of Poland’s 7 October average exchange rates of PLN 3.9111 per US dollar and PLN 4.3797 per euro, that is approximately $5.5 million or €4.9 million.
The conversions are for international context; the legally relevant penalty remains the PLN amount.
The next material development will be whether Nasz Prąd appeals.
Until the appeal position becomes clear, the correct description is that UOKiK has issued a PLN 21.475 million administrative penalty and found 21 clauses prohibited, but the decision is not yet final.
