Friday, 5:00 p.m. Your system has just confirmed 47 bookings at a price 30% lower than it should have been. The automatic confirmation went out within a second. Customers have already received confirmation emails. What do you do on Monday morning?
Pricing errors in e-commerce are not a question of “if” they will happen, but “when”. An integration with a supplier’s system returns the wrong value, someone on the team makes a mistake when importing a price list, or a discount algorithm applies two promotions at once. The result is always the same – the customer sees the price, pays, and expects the order to be fulfilled.
The problem is that Polish law does not provide for a separate category of “pricing error”. Each confirmed order constitutes a separate, binding contract. Unilateral cancellation – even when the reason is obvious – exposes your company to consumer claims, intervention by UOKiK, and reputational damage.
In this article, I describe three models for responding to a pricing error – from the most effective to the riskiest. For each one, I outline the legal basis, the conditions for using it, and specific implementation steps. You will also learn how to safeguard your terms and conditions and processes before an error occurs.
Key concepts you need to know
Before we move on to the response models, it is worth clarifying the terminology. The concepts below appear later in the article and have a direct bearing on your available options.
| Concept | What it means for your business |
|---|---|
| Mistake in a declaration of intent (Art. 84 of the Civil Code) | A mistaken understanding of the actual terms of the contract. It allows you to avoid the legal consequences of the contract, but only if the mistake was material and the other party could easily have noticed it. |
| Invitatio ad offerendum (Art. 71 of the Civil Code) | An invitation to enter into a contract – displaying a product with a price is not an offer, but merely an invitation to make offers. The contract is formed only after you confirm the order. |
| Unfair (prohibited) term | A provision in the terms and conditions that shapes consumer rights in a manner contrary to good practice and grossly infringes their interests. The customer’s acceptance of the terms and conditions does not prevent UOKiK from assessing whether a provision is unfair. |
| Omnibus Directive | EU Directive 2019/2161, implemented in Poland from January 1, 2023. It requires the lowest price from the 30 days preceding each price reduction to be displayed. It strengthens consumer confidence in pricing information. |
| Infringement of collective consumer interests | A practice for which UOKiK may impose a fine of up to 10% of turnover. There is no need to prove harm to each individual consumer – the potential to infringe the interests of a wider group is sufficient. |
Why Art. 84 of the Civil Code will not always protect you
The first thought after discovering a pricing error is: “I’ll invoke a mistake in my declaration of intent and cancel the order”. This is a natural reaction, but in most cases it is not enough.
Art. 84 of the Civil Code allows a party to avoid the legal consequences of a declaration of intent made under a mistake. However, the conditions are restrictive:
- The mistake must be material – no reasonable person, knowing the true circumstances, would have made a declaration with that content.
- The other party must have been able to notice the mistake easily – assessed from the perspective of the average consumer (reasonably observant, but not an expert).
- The deadline for avoiding the legal consequences is 1 year from discovering the mistake, and the declaration must be made in writing.
The problem arises with non-obvious price differences. If your system displayed a price of PLN 2000 instead of the correct PLN 2700 – the difference is approximately 26%. The customer may have regarded it as a promotion, a last-minute offer, or simply a good price. From the perspective of the average consumer, such a difference need not be “easy to notice” as an error.
Case law confirms this difficulty. The available district court judgments – although few in number – indicate a certain pattern:
| Case | Circumstances | Ruling |
|---|---|---|
| Wrocław-Śródmieście District Court, VIII C 1617/18 | A laptop worth >PLN 9000 offered at a grossly understated price | The court allowed the seller to avoid the contract, but noted that approving an order without verification is not protected under Art. 84 of the Civil Code. |
| Jelenia Góra District Court, V GC 557/13 | A pool cover priced below its purchase price from the manufacturer | The court found the price economically irrational – the buyer should have noticed the error |
| Warsaw District Court, II C 5474/17 | Books priced below their wholesale purchase cost | The court found such a low price to be an obvious system error |
In all three cases, the difference was gross – the sale price was lower than the cost of purchasing the goods. Where the difference from the market price is 20-30%, the chances of successfully relying on Art. 84 of the Civil Code decrease significantly.
An additional problem is the lack of Supreme Court and appellate court rulings directly addressing pricing errors in e-commerce. The available district court judgments are isolated and do not establish a consistent standard. This means that the outcome of a case is difficult to predict.
Three models for responding to a pricing error
Each of the following models addresses a different situation – from prevention (before an error becomes a contract) to crisis response (when a contract already exists). The order is deliberate: I begin with the model that gives you the most control.
Model 1: conditional booking – the order as the customer’s offer
This is the only model that allows you to reject an order containing an incorrect price without any legal consequences. It operates under Art. 71 of the Civil Code – displaying a product with a price constitutes an invitation to enter into a contract, not an offer.
How it works:
- The customer places an order – but this is their offer, not your confirmation of the contract.
- The system records the order and informs the customer that it is awaiting confirmation.
- You (or your system after validation) confirm the order – only then is the contract formed.
- If you detect a pricing error before confirmation – you reject the order. There is no need to invoke Art. 84 of the Civil Code and no risk of claims.
What you need to implement:
- Change the purchase flow – the customer’s order must be treated as an offer, not as the conclusion of a contract.
- Update your terms and conditions – clearly state that displaying a product constitutes an invitation to enter into a contract and that the contract is formed only after confirmation by the seller.
- Adjust system communications – automated messages must not include wording such as “order confirmation” or “the contract has been concluded” before actual confirmation.
- Introduce price validation – an alert for deviations above a set threshold (e.g. 15-20% from the base price) and a block on automatic confirmation where an error is suspected.
Risks of this model:
An additional step in the purchase process may affect conversion rates. A customer who does not receive immediate confirmation may abandon the purchase. It is therefore worth limiting manual confirmation to orders flagged by the system as having suspicious pricing – all others can be confirmed automatically after passing validation.
It is also worth knowing that legislation implementing Directive 2023/2673 will enter into force in June 2026 and may affect the requirements for the online ordering process. Check whether your conditional booking model will comply with the new requirements.
Model 2: a price adjustment clause in the terms and conditions – a safety net
If your system automatically confirms orders (as most systems do), the conditional booking model requires technical changes. While it is being implemented – or as an additional safeguard – you can include a price adjustment clause in your terms and conditions.
Note: this is a secondary tool, not your primary line of defense. A clause that is too broad or used too frequently may be deemed unfair.
How to draft the clause to reduce the risk of it being considered unfair:
| Clause element | Safer version | Risky version |
|---|---|---|
| Scope of application | Limited to differences of >30% from the market price | “We reserve the right to adjust the price in any circumstances” |
| Notification deadline | No more than 48 hours after the order | No specified deadline |
| Customer choice | Pay the difference to the correct price OR receive a full refund + compensation | Unilateral adjustment without the customer’s consent |
| Deadline for the customer’s decision | 3 days from notification; no decision = cancellation | No deadline or an immediate change |
| Compensation | Voucher, discount on the next order, free delivery | No compensation whatsoever |
Why this is risky without appropriate restrictions:
The customer’s acceptance of the terms and conditions does not prevent UOKiK from assessing whether a clause is unfair. The register of prohibited clauses contains more than 7400 entries. If your clause permits unilateral changes to the terms of a contract after it has been concluded – it may end up on that list.
A market example: UOKiK imposed fines totaling nearly PLN 98 million on Vectra (decisions RBG-15/2022, DOZIK 9/2024, and RBG-6/2025) for using provisions that permitted unilateral changes to contract terms.
The rule: treat a price adjustment clause as an exception, not the rule. If you use it for every third booking – UOKiK may regard it as a systemic practice rather than an isolated incident.
Model 3: amicable resolution after the contract has been concluded – crisis management
The worst-case scenario: the system has automatically confirmed the order, the contract exists, and you discover the pricing error after the fact. In this situation, you have no right to cancel the order unilaterally – but you do have room to negotiate.
Step-by-step response procedure:
- Identify and document the error – retain system logs, screenshots, and the price change history. This will be your evidence in the event of a dispute.
- Contact the customer within 48 hours – the sooner you do so, the greater the chance of an amicable resolution. UOKiK favors a conciliatory approach.
- Present the customer with two options: (a) pay the difference to the correct price and receive compensation (a voucher or discount), (b) receive a full refund of the amount paid + compensation for the inconvenience.
- Give the customer 3 days to decide – treat no response as cancellation of the order (provided this rule is set out in the terms and conditions).
- Scale the compensation – the closer the service delivery date (e.g. the departure date), the higher the compensation should be. A customer who learns of the error 2 days before departure has less room to maneuver than one who was informed on the day of booking.
What not to do:
- Do not cancel the order unilaterally – this constitutes a breach of the consumer contract.
- Do not cite a “sold-out allocation” or “lack of availability” if such a restriction was not communicated before purchase – UOKiK may regard this as an unfair commercial practice.
- Do not invoke Art. 84 of the Civil Code for differences below 30% – the chances of successfully avoiding the contract are low, and the attempt may inflame the conflict with the customer.
The scale of UOKiK sanctions – how much can it cost?
A pricing error is not a separate category in UOKiK’s statistics. The authority does not maintain a register of “pricing mistakes”. It focuses on systemic, recurring irregularities classified as unfair commercial practices.
However, the financial consequences can be serious:
| Type of sanction | Maximum amount | Imposed by |
|---|---|---|
| Infringement of collective consumer interests | Up to 10% of turnover | President of UOKiK |
| Penalty for a manager (deliberately allowing an infringement) | Up to PLN 2 million | President of UOKiK |
| Breach of price information obligations | Up to PLN 20,000 (repeat offense: up to PLN 40,000) | Trade Inspection Authority |
| Failure to provide information requested by UOKiK | Up to the equivalent of EUR 50 million | President of UOKiK |
Specific examples from 2026:
- Zalando SE – a fine of PLN 30,945,000 for incorrectly communicating promotions and incorrectly displaying the lowest price from the previous 30 days (decision of January 12, 2026, not final).
- Temu (Whaleco Technology Limited) – a fine of PLN 5,910,900 for failing to display or incorrectly displaying the lowest price from the 30 days preceding a price reduction (decision of January 12, 2026, not final).
- Trade Inspection Authority “phantom price” inspections (2023) – more than 460,000 products offered by 3026 businesses were inspected; almost half (1462) provided incorrect pricing information; 899 entities were fined a total of PLN 1,204,194.
In 2025, UOKiK issued 900 decisions and imposed fines totaling PLN 1.15 billion, including approximately PLN 545 million for infringements of collective consumer interests. Price transparency was one of the authority’s priorities.
The Omnibus Directive and pricing errors – the connection you need to know
Polish legislation implementing the Omnibus Directive has been in force since January 1, 2023. Its main requirement is that for every price reduction, you must display the lowest price from the 30 days preceding the reduction.
For your business, this means two things:
First – you must maintain a price history. Art. 4(2) of the Price Information Act requires the lowest price from the previous 30 days to be displayed next to every reduced price. This indirectly forces you to log price changes automatically – which also reduces the risk of errors going unnoticed.
Second – consumers have more reference information. If the price is accompanied by the wording “lowest price in the last 30 days: PLN 2700″, while the current price is PLN 2000 – the customer has grounds to regard it as a promotion rather than an error. This raises the threshold for an error to be considered “obvious” within the meaning of Art. 84 of the Civil Code.
The obligation applies not only to online stores, but also to advertisements, promotional leaflets, platform search results, and price comparison websites. Information about the lowest price must appear directly next to the reduced price and must be clear and unambiguous – hiding it behind expandable links or displaying it in a low-contrast color is not permitted.
How this works in Germany and France
A comparison with other EU jurisdictions shows that the Polish approach is not unique – but it does have its own distinctive features.
| Aspect | Poland | Germany | France |
|---|---|---|---|
| Legal classification of an online price display | Invitation to enter into a contract (Art. 71 of the Civil Code) – if specified in the terms and conditions | Invitatio ad offerendum – the prevailing view in BGH case law | Invitation to enter into a contract – but erreur (mistake) as a defect of consent is assessed separately |
| Obligation to display the lowest price from the previous 30 days | Since January 1, 2023 (Art. 4(2) of the Price Information Act) | Since May 28, 2022 (PAngV – Preisangabenverordnung) | Since May 28, 2022 (Code de la consommation) |
| Supervisory authority | UOKiK + Trade Inspection Authority | Bundeskartellamt + local consumer protection authorities | DGCCRF (Direction générale de la concurrence) |
| Maximum fine | Up to 10% of turnover (UOKiK) | Varies by federal state | Varies – administrative and criminal penalties |
In all three countries, the prevailing principle is that displaying a product online constitutes an invitation to enter into a contract rather than a binding offer – provided the terms and conditions are worded appropriately. This confirms that the conditional booking model has a solid basis in EU law.
Checklist: protect your company against pricing errors
The following list arranges the actions in order of priority:
| Priority | Action | Category |
|---|---|---|
| Implement immediately | Change the purchase flow to a conditional booking model (order = customer’s offer, contract = formed after your confirmation) | Process change |
| Implement immediately | Update the terms and conditions with a precise pricing error clause (threshold >30%, notification within 48h, customer choice, compensation) | Documentation |
| Implement immediately | Develop an internal response procedure: who makes the decision, how quickly the customer is contacted, what options are proposed, and what compensation is offered | Process change |
| Implement immediately | Do not use the “sold-out allocation” mechanism as a pretext for canceling orders with an incorrect price | Process change |
| Implement within one month | Introduce price validation: alerts for deviations of >15-20% from the base price and a block on automatic confirmation where an error is suspected | Process change |
| Implement within one month | Implement a mechanism for documenting pricing errors: automatic logging of price changes, screenshots, and a history of customer communications | Audit |
| Implement within one month | Train the customer service team in the procedure for amicably resolving pricing disputes: tone of communication, arguments, and escalation | Training |
Insurance and pricing errors – what does the policy cover?
Standard business liability insurance does not cover the seller’s own financial losses resulting from fulfilling orders at an incorrect price. Administrative fines imposed by UOKiK are also excluded from liability coverage.
Professional indemnity policies (E&O – Errors & Omissions) for IT service providers may offer some protection where the pricing error results from a software or integration error. One market example involved a payout of PLN 100,000 under an E&O policy for a data migration error that resulted in incorrect prices.
If you sell on platforms such as Amazon – check the insurance requirements. Amazon requires coverage of at least PLN 2,225,000 for sellers with turnover exceeding PLN 22,500.
However, insurance is no substitute for appropriate terms and conditions and procedures. Treat it as an additional layer of protection, not as your primary tool.
How we can help your company
A pricing error is an issue at the intersection of law, technology, and customer service. Your terms and conditions must be consistent with the purchase flow, your response procedure must reflect operational realities, and customer communications must comply with consumer law.
We help e-commerce platforms, booking websites, and marketplaces in three areas:
- Audit of terms and conditions and the purchase flow – we check whether your terms and conditions classify the display of products as an invitation to enter into a contract, whether automated system messages create a binding offer, and whether price adjustment clauses comply with consumer law.
- Implementation of a pricing error response procedure – we develop an internal action plan: who makes the decision, how quickly the customer is contacted, what options are proposed, and how compensation is scaled. We prepare ready-to-use communication templates.
- Compliance with Omnibus requirements and ongoing legal changes – we verify that your information obligations comply with Art. 4 of the Price Information Act, monitor new UOKiK interpretations, and prepare you for changes entering into force in 2026.
We work with technology and e-commerce companies – we understand that response time and the impact on conversion are just as important as regulatory compliance.
A pricing error is only a matter of time – prepare before it happens
A pricing error on a website is a risk faced by every company selling online. Automatic order confirmations mean that every mistake immediately becomes a binding contract – leaving no window in which to respond.
Three takeaways from this article:
- The conditional booking model is the only solution that allows you to reject an order with an incorrect price without legal consequences – make its implementation a priority.
- A price adjustment clause in the terms and conditions is a safety net, not your primary line of defense – use it only in exceptional cases, with clear restrictions and compensation for the customer.
- An amicable resolution after the contract has been concluded requires a rapid response (48 hours), documentation of the error, and proportionate compensation – UOKiK favors a conciliatory approach.
If you want to check whether your terms and conditions and processes protect you against the consequences of pricing errors – contact us. We will conduct an audit and help you implement procedures tailored to your sales model.
Frequently asked questions
A customer ordered at the wrong price and is threatening to sue – do I have to fulfill the order at that price?
If the order was confirmed (automatically or manually), a contract exists and, as a rule, binds both parties. You can try to avoid the legal consequences of your declaration of intent under Art. 84 of the Civil Code, but only if the mistake was material and the customer could easily have noticed it. Where the difference from the market price is below 30%, the chances of successfully relying on this provision are low. An amicable resolution is a better option – offer the customer the opportunity to pay the difference to the correct price and receive compensation, or provide a full refund with a voucher.
Can I state in the terms and conditions that I reserve the right to adjust the price in the event of an error?
You can, but subject to significant restrictions. An overly broad clause (e.g. “we reserve the right to adjust the price in any circumstances”) may be deemed unfair. A safer version is one limited to differences exceeding 30% of the market price, requiring the customer to be notified within 48 hours and offering a genuine choice – payment of the difference or a full refund with compensation. Remember that the customer’s acceptance of the terms and conditions does not prevent UOKiK from assessing whether a clause is unfair.
How much time do I have to inform the customer of a pricing error?
The law does not specify a strict deadline. The recommended maximum is 48 hours from the time the error is discovered. The sooner you respond, the greater the chance of an amicable resolution and the lower the risk of escalation. An error discovered 2 days before the service is due to be provided (e.g. before departure) requires proportionately higher compensation than an error discovered on the day the order was placed.
Can UOKiK fine me for canceling an order with an incorrect price?
A single, isolated cancellation of an order involving an obvious pricing error is unlikely to attract UOKiK’s attention. The authority focuses on systemic, recurring irregularities. The risk increases if you cancel orders regularly, use a “sold-out allocation” mechanism as a pretext, or offer no compensation. Fines for infringing collective consumer interests can amount to 10% of turnover – in 2026, UOKiK imposed nearly PLN 37 million in fines on Zalando and Temu for pricing irregularities.
What are the benefits of the conditional booking model, and how can it be implemented?
Under the conditional booking model, the customer’s order is treated as an offer, and the contract is formed only after you confirm it. This gives you a window in which to verify the price before an obligation arises. Implementation requires changes to the terms and conditions (classifying the display of products as an invitation to enter into a contract), the system (separating placement of the order from confirmation), and communications (automated messages must not suggest that a contract has been concluded before actual confirmation). This is the only model that allows you to reject an order containing an incorrect price without any legal consequences.
Does automatic order confirmation by the system prevent me from raising a pricing error?
No, but it makes doing so significantly more difficult. Automatic confirmation means that the contract has been concluded. From that point on, you may rely on Art. 84 of the Civil Code (mistake in a declaration of intent) or on a price adjustment clause in the terms and conditions – but both tools have limitations. The most effective preventive measure is therefore to implement price validation that blocks automatic confirmation where an error is suspected and routes the order for manual review.
