Who was sanctioned, and for what?

The three sharing providers made it difficult for holders of a Metrebus annual pass to access the free-ride passes promised when the concessions were awarded, through inadequate organisation, cumbersome activation and long waiting times, which shortened the usable time; Bird also deactivated accounts without prior notice. The AGCM imposed fines totalling 2.675 million EUR in three proceedings (Lime 1.4 million, Dott 525,000, Bird 750,000 EUR).

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Codice del Consumo (pratiche commerciali scorrette), Verfahren PS13028, PS13029, PS13030

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Published

6 Aug 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The car rental company charged customers an "administration fee" of 33.88 to 45 EUR when a rental car incurred a traffic offence – even though naming the driver is a statutory obligation of the rental company. Spain's Ministry of Social Rights, Consumer Affairs and 2030 Agenda classified this as a very serious infringement and imposed the maximum fine of 1 million EUR; a court had already declared the clause void in 2020.

Authority / court

Ministerio de Derechos Sociales, Consumo y Agenda 2030

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Artt. 82, 87.5 y 87.6 TRLGDCU (Real Decreto Legislativo 1/2007)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Repeat case

yes

Published

29 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

For refunds in the event of delays of 60 minutes or more or cancellations, Trenitalia required prior written confirmation from the call centre or ticket office. The AGCM accepted binding commitments: abolition of the confirmation requirement, strengthened refund channels, an information page on disruptions and an implementation report within three months; no infringement was found.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Codice del Consumo (impegni); EU-Fahrgastrechte im Eisenbahnverkehr

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Transport, logistics and shipping

Mitigating circumstances

Binding commitments, no finding of an infringement.

Published

30 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the Attorney General's office, the company sold an annual shipping subscription ("Celebrations Passport") whose terms between February 2021 and June 2022 appeared only in small print, in linked terms or in pop-up boxes; a post-purchase acknowledgement and a notice before automatic renewal were missing. In the Assurance of Discontinuance it undertakes to pay 375,000 USD in penalties, fees and costs, to refund subscribers and to change its subscription processes. The authority allegedly made the findings set out here; this account is not based on a final judgment.

Authority / court

Office of the New York State Attorney General

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

New York General Business Law §§ 349, 527-a; Executive Law § 63(12); Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (15 U.S.C. § 8403)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

22 Jul 2026

Original amount 375,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 21 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On the confirmation page of its online cancellation process, a gym operator displayed a highlighted notice with the button "Pause contract via self-service"; in addition, the confirmation button was labelled "Find contract", which the defendant had already acknowledged. In an action brought by the Federation of German Consumer Organisations (Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband), the BGH ruled that the confirmation page may only contain the information required for the cancellation and the confirmation button, set aside the judgment of the Higher Regional Court of Düsseldorf (OLG Düsseldorf) dismissing the action to that extent and ordered the operator to cease and desist.

Authority / court

Bundesgerichtshof (I. Zivilsenat), Az. I ZR 200/25

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

§ 312k Abs. 1 Satz 1, Abs. 2 BGB (Kündigungsbutton)

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Other

Published

16 Jul 2026

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

In its flight booking flow, Agoda Company Pte. Ltd. did not show clearly whether a ticket was refundable and which cancellation or change fees applied – the information could only be reached via a link to baggage rules – and, for accommodation paid later, displayed a price without the possible surcharge of up to 5%, partly in a foreign currency. The authority regarded this as a breach of the duty to explain key terms under the Telecommunications Business Act (전기통신사업법), imposed a fine of 2,424,000,000 KRW and ordered Agoda to show conditions, fees and final prices early and clearly, to check screen flows internally in advance and to have Korean translations reviewed by professionals.

Authority / court

Korea Media and Communications Commission (KMCC, 방송미디어통신위원회)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Telecommunications Business Act (전기통신사업법) Art. 50(1) Nr. 5-2, Art. 52, Art. 53; Enforcement Decree Art. 42 i. V. m. Anhang 4

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Media and online platforms

Repeat case

no

Mitigating circumstances

Reduction of 10% because the authority had not imposed a fine in the preceding three years; partial voluntary corrections made after the investigation began were not accepted as a mitigating factor.

Published

6 Jul 2026

Original amount 2,424,000,000 KRW, converted at the ECB reference rate of 6 Jul 2026.

Checked against the official source on 4 Oct 2026 · Direct link

On its Allegro account, the electronics retailer promised dispatch within 24 hours even for goods not in stock and did not inform customers in good time of delays or unavailability. UOKiK imposed a fine of 3,043,000 PLN; the decision is not final.

Authority / court

Urząd Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (UOKiK)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Verletzung kollektiver Verbraucherinteressen

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

26 Jun 2026

Original amount 3,043,000 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

Using its new powers under the DMCCA 2024, the CMA found that the electrical retailer had pre-selected and charged customers on its website for paid extra services (removal of the old appliance, packaging disposal) without their express consent during the period examined, April to November 2025. It imposed a fine of GBP 720,000 (GBP 1,200,000 before a 40% settlement discount) and required the company to refund the amounts charged in this way to affected customers (around GBP 600,000 according to the CMA).

Authority / court

Competition and Markets Authority (CMA)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Regulation 40 Consumer Contracts (Information, Cancellation and Additional Charges) Regulations 2013; Chapter 4 Part 3 Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Mitigating circumstances

40% discount for admission and settlement (including waiver of appeal); the practice was stopped on the day the investigation was opened.

Published

18 Jun 2026

Original amount 720,000 GBP, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Jun 2026.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to the AGCM, eDreams misled consumers about the alleged benefits of its "Prime" subscription using deceptive design elements and manipulative techniques and pushed them into membership (practice A); it also made it hard to leave the subscription (practice B). Vacaciones eDreams S.L., eDreams International Network S.L. and eDreams S.r.l. were jointly and severally fined 6,000,000 and 3,000,000 EUR, a total of 9,000,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Art. 20, 21, 22, 23 Abs. 1 lit. g, 24, 25, 26 lit. f Codice del consumo (D.lgs. 206/2005)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

4 Feb 2026

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The telecoms provider pleaded guilty to using a prohibited clause allowing unilateral amendment of contracts without the specific conditions required by law, and to omitting mandatory information from distance contracts for successive services, such as a detailed description of the services, the price and description of devices offered as a premium, usage restrictions and geographical limits. Fines totalling CAD 210,700 including costs were imposed on 50 counts; the offences dated from 2012 and 2013.

Authority / court

Gericht in Montréal (Ermittlung: Office de la protection du consommateur (OPC); Anklage: Directeur des poursuites criminelles et pénales (DPCP))

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Loi sur la protection du consommateur (RLRQ c. P-40.1), Art. 11.2 und 214.2

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Published

6 Feb 2026

Original amount 210,700 CAD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 15 Dec 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

The bank lacked adequate systems to give borrowers and, in some cases, guarantors the legally required information about their loans, and in some cases did not apply agreed interest rate discounts on home loans; up to 11,398 borrowers and up to 3,012 guarantors were affected. Following a settlement with the Commerce Commission (New Zealand's competition, consumer and credit regulator), the High Court declared breaches of the responsible lending principles (s 9C CCCFA) and imposed an allegedly agreed civil pecuniary penalty of 3.64 million NZD, according to the Commission the highest under the CCCFA so far. Westpac had self-reported the conduct and refunded 2.67 million NZD to those affected.

Authority / court

High Court (Klage: Commerce Commission)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Credit Contracts and Consumer Finance Act 2003, ss 9C(1), 9C(2)(a)(ii), 9C(2)(a)(iii)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Self-report, admission of the breaches before proceedings were filed and refunds of 2.67 million NZD to those affected.

Published

28 Nov 2025

Original amount 3,640,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 28 Nov 2025.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

According to the allegations of the attorneys general, the online fashion retailer enrolled buyers in a paid VIP membership programme without their express consent, presented prices in a misleading way and made cancellation difficult. Under the settlement with 32 states and D.C., TFG is providing around 3.8 million USD in automatic refunds and paying 1 million USD to the states; the settlement does not constitute an admission of guilt.

Authority / court

Attorney General of Pennsylvania (verhandelt mit Maryland, Texas und D.C.; Vergleich mit 33 Attorneys General)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Verbraucherschutzgesetze der beteiligten Bundesstaaten

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Published

23 Oct 2025

Original amount 4,800,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 23 Oct 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Amazon used confusing order screens to push millions of customers into Prime subscriptions without their consent and deliberately made cancellation difficult. The settlement comprises a civil penalty of 1 billion USD and 1.5 billion USD in refunds, as well as a clear decline button and simple cancellation.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA); Section 5 FTC Act

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Liability of senior managers

The press release names a Senior Vice President and a Vice President.

Published

25 Sep 2025

Original amount 2,500,000,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 25 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 27 Sep 2026 · Version 2 · Direct link

According to the AGCM, ALD Automotive Italia gave long-term rental customers insufficient information about the optional liability-limitation service and about the criteria for assessing damage on return, and charged damage as unreported even where it was not visible to the naked eye for an average consumer or did not result from an incident. The authority imposed a fine of 5,000,000 EUR and prohibited continuation.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Art. 20, 21, 22, 24, 25 Codice del consumo (D.lgs. 206/2005)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Automotive

Mitigating circumstances

The basic amount of 7,000,000 EUR was reduced to 5,000,000 EUR because ALD had remedied the information deficiencies through its own measures and mitigated their effects.

Published

9 Oct 2025

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Direct link

According to the FTC complaint, the education provider hid the cancellation option for its automatically renewing subscriptions on its website and, since October 2020, continued to charge almost 200,000 customers even after they had cancelled. Under the settlement, Chegg is paying 7.5 million USD for refunds and must offer simple cancellation.

Authority / court

Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Restore Online Shoppers' Confidence Act (ROSCA); Section 5 FTC Act

Action

Disgorgement of profits

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Telecoms, IT and software

Repeat case

yes

Published

15 Sep 2025

Original amount 7,500,000 USD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 18 Sep 2025.

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

On the website wolffashion.de, GT Ecom B.V. did not clearly tell buyers before purchase that goods would be shipped directly by the manufacturer from China and that returns had to be sent to China. The ACM (Autoriteit Consument & Markt, Dutch competition and consumer authority) considered 100,000 EUR appropriate and reduced the fine to 90,000 EUR because the company admitted the infringements in the simplified procedure.

Authority / court

Autoriteit Consument & Markt (ACM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Art. 8.2a Abs. 1 Whc i. V. m. Art. 6:230m Abs. 1 lit. g und h BW

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Mitigating circumstances

10% reduction for admitting and ending the infringements and cooperating in the simplified procedure.

Published

8 May 2025

Checked against the official source on 2 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Two gym operators announced a fee increase of 6 EUR a month and treated silence or the failure to exercise a special right of termination as consent. In an action brought by the Austrian Federal Chamber of Labour (Bundesarbeitskammer), the OGH upheld the prohibition of such increases without express agreement and the publication of the judgment; it dismissed claims for repayment and information.

Authority / court

Oberster Gerichtshof (OGH), GZ 4 Ob 51/25s

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

§ 6 Abs. 1 Z 2, § 28a KSchG; §§ 1a, 14 UWG

Action

Order

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Other

Checked against the official source on 25 Sep 2026 · Direct link

The group did not inform users registering for its photo and video network via the website adequately and immediately that their data are collected and used for commercial purposes (practice 1). When accounts were suspended, its other social network did not state whether the decision was automated or manual, and neither service referred to out-of-court and judicial remedies; in addition, the 30-day deadline for internal complaints was relatively short (practice 2). The AGCM fined the group and its Irish subsidiary 3,000,000 and 500,000 EUR jointly and severally, a total of 3,500,000 EUR.

Authority / court

Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Art. 20, 21, 22 (Praxis 1) sowie Art. 20 (Praxis 2) Codice del consumo (D.lgs. 206/2005)

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

unknown

Sector

Media and online platforms

Employees

10,000 or more

Published

5 Jun 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 21 May 2026 · Direct link

UOKiK objected to three misleading practices in the retailer's own sales on its Polish platform: the „Kup teraz“ button suggested that a purchase had been concluded, although the contract was only formed on dispatch confirmation; availability and delivery dates were stated inaccurately; and the terms of the „Gwarancja Dostawy“ (delivery guarantee) were not communicated clearly. The fines amount to PLN 9,651,558, 17,372,804 and 4,825,779, totalling PLN 31,850,141; the retailer must also publish a statement on the decision on the platform and by e-mail. The decision is not final.

Authority / court

Prezes Urzędu Ochrony Konkurencji i Konsumentów (UOKiK)

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Art. 24 Abs. 2 Nr. 3 und Art. 26 ustawa o ochronie konkurencji i konsumentów i. V. m. Art. 4, 5 und 6 ustawa o przeciwdziałaniu nieuczciwym praktykom rynkowym

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

under appeal

Sector

Retail and e-commerce

Employees

10,000 or more

Original amount 31,850,141 PLN, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Mar 2024.

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 26 Mar 2026 · Direct link

The Banco de España (Spanish central bank and banking supervisor) imposed two fines totalling 2,700,000 EUR (1,800,000 and 900,000 EUR after a 40% reduction) on the bank. Between June 2018 and June 2019 the bank breached information duties in marketing credit cards, in calculating interest under the revolving repayment option and in interest and fee statements, and did not properly provide or draft pre-contractual and contractual documents for consumer credit.

Authority / court

Banco de España

Area of law

Consumer protection and online retail · Information duties in online retail

Legal basis

Art. 93.f) und 98.1.b) Ley 10/2014 de ordenación, supervisión y solvencia de entidades de crédito i. V. m. Orden 2899/2011 und Circular 5/2012 del Banco de España; Art. 34.2 Ley 16/2011 de contratos de crédito al consumo; Art. 85 Ley 39/2015

Action

Fine

Status of proceedings

final

Sector

Financial services and insurance

Mitigating circumstances

Both fines were reduced by 40% under Art. 85 Ley 39/2015 (Spanish Administrative Procedure Act).

Published

12 Aug 2024

Checked against the official source on 28 Sep 2026 · Company name anonymised since 21 Dec 2025 · Direct link