Żabka franchisees report suspected offences to prosecutors

A group of 32 Żabka franchisees and former business partners have filed a report with prosecutors in Warsaw alleging possible criminal offences. According to a report published by the Kresy news website on 28 October 2026, citing Monika Krześniak’s reporting for Kanał Zero, the complainants dispute accounting records, stock levels and invoices. These are allegations requiring investigation, not a finding of liability on the part of the chain.

The report and supporting accounting documents

According to Kresy, the complainants submitted documents relating to alleged irregularities in their business dealings with Żabka. They are calling for an investigation into the chain’s activities and clarification of the terms governing its relationships with shop operators. The case centres on how goods are accounted for and how those transactions are recorded in documents.

The report raises suspicions of fraud, computer fraud, the issuing and use of inaccurate invoices, and both the certification of false information in documents and the forging or alteration of documents. This describes the scope of the complainants’ suspicions. It should not be confused with charges brought by prosecutors or a court finding that an offence has occurred.

When assessing the case, it is important to distinguish between the accounts given by those involved in the business relationship, the contents of the submitted documents and any findings by law enforcement authorities. The complainants want the documents examined to establish whether the events they describe could provide grounds for criminal liability. Reporting suspicions does not, in itself, determine the outcome of that assessment.

Franchisees dispute charges for goods

One of the most serious issues raised in the report concerns charges for deliveries. “We have to pay for goods that never arrived at our shop,” reads a statement quoted by Kresy from the Kanał Zero report. This is a claim by someone describing their dealings with the chain, not an independently verified finding about a particular delivery.

Those interviewed by the journalist also describe debt, long working hours and family disputes. Their accounts include working days of up to 17 hours. These descriptions illustrate the financial and personal consequences that the complainants associate with running their shops. They do not, however, justify attributing the same experiences to all Żabka franchisees.

Two issues need to be kept separate here: whether particular charges and accounting records were correct, and the assessment of workload and business risk. A business owner’s financial difficulties are not, in themselves, evidence that an invoice is inaccurate. Equally, an allegation of incorrect charges for goods requires a separate explanation, regardless of whether the shop concerned was profitable.

For the franchise community, the key question raised by these accounts is whether shop operators can verify how the amounts they owe have been calculated. This means being able to reconcile deliveries, stock records and invoices, and then establish how any discrepancy is resolved. It is a practical aspect of monitoring a franchise relationship, separate from determining whether the reported suspicions of criminal activity are substantiated.

Calls for transparent contracts and protection for business owners

Those featured in the report present their experiences as evidence of a wider problem with the terms governing franchise relationships in Poland. In their view, the current framework does not adequately protect business owners against unfavourable contract terms, unclear accounting and the transfer of financial risk to shop operators.

The complainants are calling on politicians to introduce legislation regulating this business model. They want greater transparency in contracts and accounting, alongside stronger protection for business owners. This is a demand made by parties to the dispute, not an announcement that new legislation has been passed or changes have taken effect.

The call for legislation accompanies the report to prosecutors but does not replace it. Proposals to change the rules governing franchise relationships concern the future operating conditions of the franchise community. The report to prosecutors, by contrast, concerns specific suspicions and documents submitted for investigation. Keeping these issues separate avoids treating a call for legislation as evidence in an individual dispute.

What to check in your own franchise relationship

For current and prospective franchisees, the case is a reason to review carefully the procedures for documenting deliveries and disputing charges. Before signing an agreement, establish what data is available to reconstruct the shop’s accounts, how missing goods should be reported and how the franchisor’s response is recorded. Questions should focus on specific procedures, rather than general assurances of support alone.

If you already operate a shop, it is worth retaining delivery confirmations, stock records, invoices, adjustment documents and correspondence about complaints. In a dispute, it may help to list each contested item alongside its date, supporting document and a description of the discrepancy. This is a recommendation on record-keeping, not an assessment of the evidence submitted by those reporting the Żabka case.

Practical takeaway: before joining a franchise network, check not only the financial terms but also whether you can independently verify the accounts and charges. If a dispute arises, document specific events and distinguish suspicions from facts that can be substantiated.