(Finance) – L ‘Competition and market authority authority he joined the General Logistics Systems BV companies jointly and head, head of the GLS group in EuropeGeneral Logistics Systems Italy Spa and General Logistics Systems Enterprise Srl one penalty of 8 million euros. The authority has in fact ascertained that the environmental sustainability initiative “Climate Protect“, With which GLS – an important and well -known group – built its own green image has been organized, financed and communicated without the transparency, rigor and diligence required for operators of a very polluting sector, such as that of shipping, transport and delivery of goods.
Taking into account that the growing awareness of environmental issues increasingly influences the purchase behaviors and the reputation of companies with respect to their competitors, it has been ascertained that, as part of the environmental sustainability program created by General Logistics Systems BV, the Three companies have used ambiguous environmental statements and/or presented in a non -clear, specific, accurate, unequivocal and verifiable way on the General Logistics Systems Italy Spa website, it also emerged that customers subscribed to the services of General Logistics Systems Enterprise was forced to join this program and to pay an economic contribution so as to obtain a certificate, not requested, certifying the compensation of CO2 emissions relating to their respective shipments. This contribution has been defined regardless of a prior verification of the costs attributable to the “Climate Protect” program, exempting large customers from payment and suggesting that the group company themselves would have contributed significantly to its financing.
Instead, it turned out that the companies of the GLS group, in addition to having poured all the economic charges related to the program on its subscriber customers and on the companies of shipments affiliated to the general logistics system Systems Italy, have collected greater contributions of the costs incurred to implement the program. In addition, the communications sent to subscribed customers and affiliated companies and the certifications on the compensation of CO2 emissions issued to customers and businesses for their shipments were deceptive, ambiguous and/or untruthful.
The authority thus ascertained that these conduct integrate an incorrect commercial practice in violation of articles 20, 21, 22 and 26, lett. f) of the consumer code.