12:41 18 February 2025
Cartel Concerns Persist in Truck Sales Sector
A long-standing cartel among Polish truck dealers continues to defy regulatory actions and court rulings, according to recent developments. Despite multiple decisions including huge penalties from the Office of Competition and Consumer Protection (UOKiK) in 2019, 2021, 2022 and September 2024 and a final court ruling in April 2024, the DBK Group remains actively involved in anti-competitive practices, disregarding both Polish and European Union regulations.
The UOKiK first launched its investigation in 2019 against five companies: DBK from Olsztyn, ESA Trucks Polska from Komorniki, TB Truck & Trailer Serwis from Wolica, Van Tilburg-Bastianen Groep from the Netherlands, and WTC from Długołęka (DBK group). Nine senior managers were also implicated in the case. The watchdog uncovered evidence suggesting that since at least 2011, these companies had been colluding to divide the Polish market for DAF truck sales, restricting competition and driving up prices.
Evidence obtained during raids in 2018 showed that participating companies referred to their agreement as a “pact” or “conspiracy,” demonstrating awareness of its illegality. The dealers allegedly divided sales territories, coordinated pricing, and discouraged customers from purchasing vehicles outside their assigned regions by artificially inflating prices.
Following its investigation, UOKiK imposed significant fines on the involved companies and individuals. Under Polish and EU competition law, such collusive agreements can result in penalties of up to 10% of a company’s turnover, with individuals facing fines of up to 2 million PLN.
In December 2021, UOKiK issued a formal decision (DOK-6/2021) confirming the existence of the cartel. DBK and WTC appealed the decision, but the District Court in Warsaw, Competition and Consumer Protection Division, dismissed the appeals on April 22, 2024. The ruling reaffirmed UOKiK’s findings and upheld the penalties.
Despite the court’s final judgment, DBK Group’s cartel continue to engage in illegal activities. The President of UOKiK, Tomasz Chróstny, imposed last September fines totaling PLN 238 million (EUR 57 million). Additional evidence provided to authorities suggests that these companies have not ceased their market division practices, openly flouting competition laws. Iveco Poland, along with DBK group (WTC, CTC, ON ROAD TRUCK SERVICES) is suspected of maintaining a decade-long illegal agreement that included territorial divisions, price-fixing, and bid-rigging in public tenders.
UOKiK’s investigation into DBK group and its network revealed that the company allegedly assigned specific regions to dealers, manipulated discount policies, and exchanged confidential customer information. These practices further limited market competition and inflated vehicle prices.
“The persistence of these cartels undermines fair competition in the heavy vehicle market and ultimately affects consumers,” said a UOKiK spokesperson. “Higher truck prices increase operating costs for transport companies, which can translate into higher consumer prices.”
The case highlights the challenges of dismantling well-established cartels, even in the face of regulatory action and legal decisions. As authorities consider further enforcement measures, the continued participation of DBK Group and Iveco Poland in anti-competitive practices remains a significant concern for market fairness and consumer protection.
Fines don’t seem to deter DBK from engaging in such practices, with EUR 500 million annual turnover, they can afford to pay the penalties without much impact on their operations.
Fines for breaking EU Competition Law The Polish Authority and the Council Regulation 1/2003,vii based on Article 103 TFEU, gives the European Commission powers to enforce these rules and fine companies for infringements. It sets out the principles that the fine should be based on the gravity and the duration of the infringement and caps the maximum fine at 10% of turnover as mentioned above.
Whistleblowers and informants can be both individuals (e.g. employees or industry insiders) and companies that suspect that their employers, suppliers, customers or competitors are engaged in a cartel. Companies that have themselves been involved in a cartel should instead report and cooperate under the leniency program. EuropeanCommission's LINK
The risk is not only penalties but also reputational. Compliance makes it possible to protect companies' reputation among their customers, employees, suppliers, financial partners etc.
Truck producers were also involved in the past, however the European Commission penalties and class action lawsuits from customers make it stop. The European Commission fined truck producers like DAF and Iveco over € 3 billion for participating in a cartel in 2016 and 2017. Under the Commission's 2006 Leniency Notice, MAN received full immunity for revealing the existence of the cartel, thereby avoiding a fine of around €1.2 billion. For their cooperation with the investigation, Volvo/Renault, Daimler and Iveco benefited from reductions of their fines under the 2006 Leniency Notice. The reductions reflect the timing of their cooperation and the extent to which the evidence they provided helped the Commission to prove the existence of the cartel.
Today buyers of 70,000 trucks purchased at allegedly inflated prices are demanding more than 500 millions euro in compensation from manufacturers MAN, Daimler, Iveco and Volvo/Renault. It means that not only authorities can fight against cartels, but also customers through court claims.
Financing a company involved in a cartel can expose enterprises to legal risks. Cartels—agreements between businesses to fix prices, limit production, or divide markets—are illegal under antitrust and competition laws (the Sherman Act in the United States, Article 101 of the TFEU in the European Union, the Competition Act in United Kingdom).
If a bank or an investment company knowingly finance a company engaged in cartel activities, the lender/equity provider could face legal consequences such as fines, asset seizures, or even criminal liability, depending on the jurisdiction. Even unintentional involvement can lead to reputational damage, regulatory scrutiny, or financial losses if the company is fined or dissolved. Considering financing a company, it’s crucial to conduct due diligence to ensure it complies with competition laws.
Banks or private equity firms or investment companies financing cartel-involved companies can face legal scrutiny for aiding and abetting anti-competitive behavior. Investors can suffer stock price declines, dividend cuts, or reputational damage. Regulatory bodies (like the U.S. DOJ, European Commission) can investigate financiers if they are suspected of knowingly supporting a cartel.
The investment companies and lenders should conduct thorough investigations into a company’s compliance history before financing. The financiers should stay updated on regulatory actions and lawsuits. The lenders should have compliance policies and ensure that financed companies have strong compliance programs.
DBK is a Polish truck dealership and service chain, active for more than 20 years, with an annual turnover around EUR 500 million. It consists in 24 truck dealers and around 1500 employees.
