Poland’s Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) recently took strong action against two Polish clothing companies, Lord and Lavard. The clothing industry saw a record penalty with Lavard receiving a fine of over PLN 3.8 mln (approx. EUR 836,000) and Lord over PLN 213,000 (approx. EUR 47,000). These fines were given for deceiving customers about the materials used in clothes produced by these companies. This action underscores the increasing need for business transparency in this sector.
Store checks and tests
The allegations were substantiated through thorough inspections conducted by Trade Inspectorate officers at stores in Poland and comprehensive laboratory tests in UOKiK’s laboratory. The inspections and tests focused on a variety of clothing items, including jackets, suits, suit pants, and shirts. The investigators cross-verified the manufacturers’ claims about the percentage of various materials, such as wool, cotton, and polyester, in these items.
Reality vs labelled composition
Of the 27 samples of Lavard-branded clothes tested, as many as 24 were found to not have the declared material composition. Similarly, out of 11 samples of Lord-branded clothes, 10 were found to be in the same issue. For example, the Lavard jacket, which was labelled as containing 50 percent wool, 30 percent polyester, and 20 percent viscose, was found to contain no wool at all, 77.2 percent polyester, 19.6 percent viscose, and an unmentioned 3.2 percent elastane. Another instance was the Lavard Nos Chinos Pants, labelled as having 60 percent wool, but found to contain no wool, 70 percent polyester, and 30 percent viscose.
UOKiK’s decision and its implications for the industry
In its decisions, UOKiK stressed that customers rely on labels for material information when buying clothes and accurate information in this respect is often the main driver for purchasing decisions. UOKiK concluded that if Lavard and Lord’s customers had accurate and truthful information on the composition of their clothing products, they might have decided against purchasing them.
UOKiK’s decisions have significant implications for the clothing industry. They not only signal a robust regulatory response to misleading business practices, but also underscore the necessity for businesses to uphold transparency in this area. Moreover, these decisions are a reminder that that regulatory focus in the clothing industry extends beyond standard assessments of traditional marketing practices.
As the decisions are not final and can be appealed in court, businesses can still present their cases. However, regardless of the outcomes of any potential appeals, the message to the industry is clear: transparency of material labels is non-negotiable.
Following these decisions, clothing industry entrepreneurs should take a proactive approach towards ensuring transparency. This might involve applying stricter quality control measures, conducting regular audits of material sources, and training staff to accurately represent product compositions to consumers.
For further information, please contact:
Monika Hughes, Bird & Bird
monika.hughes@twobirds.com
