Helpfind eyes its next claims market

Helpfind, based in Ostrów Wielkopolski and backed by foreign funds, has emerged as the banking sector’s public enemy no. 1. CEO Konrad Piechota discusses the company’s disputes with the financial sector and the business model of a firm that is now reviewing another 20 products for potential violations.

Piotr Sobolewski, XYZ: You are suing banks on a massive scale, seeking interest-free loans – first for Swiss franc mortgages and now for consumer loans. Why are you doing it?

Konrad Piechota, CEO of Helpfind: We are not producing or inventing anything new. Our business is a response to practices we see in the market. In many cases, it is the only solution for a customer who needs someone in their corner to help them. In the case of consumer loans covered by the free-credit sanction (SKD), we are often talking about less affluent customers for whom legal assistance in Poland has not been available to a sufficient extent. That is why, for years, we have been building a technology, legal and financial hub that combines data, automation, claims financing, cooperation with reputable law firms and large-scale customer service.

Helpfind has found a way to finance disputes with banks

But Poland is hardly short of lawyers...

True, but consumers have to take the initiative themselves, be aware that they can pursue claims and usually pay for legal assistance upfront. The assignment of claims and handling cases with no upfront fee [the law firm is paid a success fee if the case is won – ed.], both of which we offer, are often the only viable options for less affluent borrowers seeking to enforce their rights.

We are also the first company in Poland to implement litigation finance, a model well established abroad [investment funds cover the costs of litigation in exchange for a share of the proceeds if the case is won – ed.]. We secured our first external financing at the end of 2022. To date, we have worked with four funds in various arrangements.

Did you find them yourself?

We are a small company from a small city, but a very creative one. This is an industry that has operated successfully abroad for many years. Such funds are a bit like David taking on Goliath. At the same time, they are large enough that, with their backing, we can afford to see the cases we handle through to the end. The banks know that. They will not wear us down by dragging proceedings out. We will not disappear from the market like companies that lacked sufficient financial backing.

The scale of free-credit cases pushed the issue into the public spotlight

And that is why, in the eyes of bankers, you became public enemy no. 1.

That narrative is hardly surprising. Instead of 1,000-2,000 free-credit sanction cases a year, a company appeared on the market that brought together more than 10,000 clients and took their cases to court. The rules governing the free-credit sanction had already been in force, but it was only the growing scale of litigation that brought the issue into the public debate and prompted banks to start setting aside provisions for these cases.

Helpfind’s results have added fuel to the fire. In 2025, you generated PLN 122 million in revenue. That is almost an eightfold increase in five years. Has the company ever been in better shape?

Yes, but please bear in mind that we are still a small company. Our profitability is lower than that of the banks.

Helpfind’s profits are rising. Bankers say: “At customers’ expense”

Are you aware that these days, most conversations with bankers about legal risk sooner or later turn to the activities of companies such as Helpfind? They accuse you of making money at customers’ expense: paying them very little while keeping the entire award yourselves.

That accusation is not justified. We give customers a choice. They have two options: either we handle the case, in which case we charge a small upfront fee and a 10-15% commission on any amount awarded by the court, or they assign the rights to the claim to us. In that case, we pay part of the amount immediately and another part if the case is won.

Depending on the package selected, this may be 10% upfront and 30% after a successful outcome, 15% upfront and 20% after a successful outcome, or 20% upfront and 10% after a successful outcome. Importantly, the assignment covers only borrowing costs already incurred; it does not cover future costs.

If the case is won, 100% of the future savings remain with the customer and are refunded or credited by the bank for their benefit. This, in turn, significantly reduces loan repayments, and the customer does not have to launch separate proceedings to achieve that. If the case is lost [the cases are handled by law firms working with Helpfind – ed.], the customer keeps the amount already paid to them, while we bear the loss.

Could you pay more?

We are aware that the price paid for an assignment is controversial. But please bear in mind that we assume the risk and the costs of the proceedings. We have no guarantee that we will win the case, and the value of money changes over time. In practice, we earn 30-40% on such a case, sometimes less. Compared with the market, that is a competitive offer.

Abusive clauses in customer contracts? “We don’t have any”

Presumably, your contracts are also beyond reproach? Bankers argue that they contain abusive clauses, including provisions that make it unclear how customers’ compensation is calculated.

Customers know exactly how much they will receive. We present them with a clear offer stating both the value of the claim and the price of the assignment. Our contracts are drafted by experienced lawyers, and I do not believe they contain any abusive clauses. We are subject to audits, including by UOKiK [Poland’s Office of Competition and Consumer Protection – ed.] and external law firms, for compliance with consumer law. As far as I know, no company in the sector has been fined, while one of our competitors has merely received recommendations in this area.

At Helpfind, we focus on raising consumer awareness, just as we did with Swiss franc mortgages. Even today, many people still lack sufficient knowledge about these issues, while some cannot afford to pursue legal proceedings. Yet the root of the entire problem lies in the toxic products offered by the financial sector.

Helpfind and Lexitor put free-credit sanctions on the map in Poland

More specifically, where did the problem of charging interest on financed commissions come from? This is now the main area in which customers seek to invoke the free-credit sanction, allowing them to repay only the principal borrowed, without interest or other costs.

The free-credit sanction began gaining traction on a larger scale in Poland thanks to two companies: Lexitor and ours. Lexitor, together with a team of lawyers, had previously been behind the case that resulted in a ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union on the proportional reimbursement of commissions [the so-called “small CJEU” case, judgment C-383/18 of 2019, after which banks began refunding customers a proportionate share of fees and commissions when loans were repaid early – ed.]. We, meanwhile, carefully read the EU directives and analyzed thousands of loan agreements.

To begin with, commissions on loans had always existed and nobody found them unusual. But between 2013 and 2016, as interest rates fell, competition intensified and demand remained strong, banks began raising commissions significantly. The role of external credit intermediaries was also important. Some banks in Poland effectively grew on the back of intermediated consumer lending. Examples include Getin Bank, Lukas Bank - now Credit Agricole - and Alior Bank, which acquired Meritum Bank.

The problem began when intermediaries started dictating terms and demanding ever-higher commissions. There were cases in which the commission on a PLN 120,000 loan ran into tens of thousands of zlotys.

Have you seen products like that?

Of course. Let me give you an example from our database: 96 installments, a commission of PLN 74,898.49 and a loan amount of PLN 122,202.80. We have tens of thousands of loan agreements in our system, and in many of them the commissions are unreasonably high. That is why banks began financing those commissions, in effect providing customers with additional credit to cover them. They then charged interest on that portion of the loan.

The problem includes the quality – and cost – of financial intermediation

This angle is rarely discussed. Why?

Because it points to a systemic problem: the quality of financial intermediation in Poland. Customers are often not told the total amount they will have to repay, nor are the commissions charged for granting the loan clearly explained. The conversation tends to focus on how much money they need and how large a monthly installment they want to pay. I also get the impression that only a small part of the financial sector is genuinely interested in ensuring that customers are properly informed.

Banks found themselves in a bind. Commissions were rising, while a large share of sales was already being handled by external intermediaries. So if we want to discuss the free-credit sanction today, we also need to open up the debate about intermediation. When, following the so-called small CJEU ruling, we gained access to customers’ agreements, we realized just how high the fees and additional costs were. I find it hard to believe that the market was unaware of the legal risk associated with charging interest on commissions.

But this was common practice, and the authorities also shared that interpretation.

There are banks and financial products where interest was deliberately not charged on commissions. We have virtually no such agreements from, for example, ING or many cooperative banks. Did they have worse lawyers who failed to come up with the same idea as their competitors, or was the quality of their sales process simply better? In my view, it was the latter.

What could be done to change the situation in the intermediation market?

Interest charged on commissions is a problem, but we should not lose sight of the size of those commissions themselves. The aim is to stop intermediaries from charging such high fees and, as a result, make consumer credit cheaper. When I took out a PLN 270,000 mortgage with Nordea in 2012, I paid a PLN 2,000 commission. Today, it is common to see PLN 40,000 consumer loans carrying commissions of PLN 6,000-7,000.

Helpfind accounts for nearly half of Poland’s free-credit lawsuits

According to the Polish Bank Association, there are 34,000 free-credit sanction lawsuits on the market. What share of them involve Helpfind?

Almost half of all free-credit sanction lawsuits. But the market still has considerable and growing potential. From a business perspective, that is good news. There is also a less positive side: on a purely personal level, we would prefer the financial market not to create a need for companies like ours to operate in this way.

At the same time, we can see court rulings evolving. Our internal data show that banks now win only 60% of cases across the market, and 50% in cases involving us. We are talking here about judgments by courts of second instance.

Banks say that 80% of judgments go in their favor. Are you more effective than your competitors, or do you define a “win” differently?

I think it all comes down to how up to date the figures are. The case law is evolving and changing quite noticeably. There is probably little point in trading statistics like these. Let us wait a few months. Time will tell us more.

What do these lawsuits concern? Incorrect calculations of the total loan amount and APR as a result of financing commissions? That is precisely the issue on which the CJEU ruled in April…

…And, in addition, as Poland’s Supreme Court stressed in July, a single violation that qualifies for the sanction under Article 45 of the Consumer Credit Act is enough to trigger the free-credit sanction. There is no need to demonstrate multiple irregularities. These can involve various elements: an incorrectly stated APR or total cost of credit, charging interest on costs, unclear rules for changing the interest rate, or incorrect information about early repayment. These are not “typos or misplaced commas.”

History repeating itself? “This time, it will move faster”

When will you be winning 90% of cases, as you did with Swiss franc mortgages?

With Swiss franc mortgages, it took quite a long time from the first lawsuits for the case law to begin moving in consumers’ favor. The CJEU’s October 2019 ruling in the Dziubak case obviously helped. At the time, banks were telling us that the problem was niche and affected “one, perhaps two banks.”

We are hearing the same thing now. Does that mean history is about to repeat itself?

This time, it will move faster. The legal system is learning how to deal with these kinds of disputes more quickly than it did with Swiss franc mortgages. Much less time passed between the launch of Helpfind’s free-credit sanction program and the first preliminary questions being referred to the CJEU than in the Swiss franc cases. We already effectively have two answers from the CJEU. Another six or seven questions have also been referred to the Court. The rulings will come gradually and shape the case law.

Two million people face a genuine problem with interest charged on commissions

But after the CJEU’s April ruling in case C-744/24, has the flood of lawsuits already begun?

It is not a flood. For banks, this is still a tiny issue because the value of these cases does not amount to even one-tenth of the value of Swiss franc mortgage disputes. Banks are nevertheless concerned that customers, supported by legal counsel, will file lawsuits. From our perspective, the free-credit sanction is extraordinarily straightforward. It is a bit like a schedule of traffic fines. There is a list of violations and obligations that must be observed. The dispute is about whether a bank crossed the limits set by law – much like a driver exceeding the speed limit in a built-up area.

How many customers will go to court to seek the free-credit sanction?

Fewer than people might think. In our view, around 2 million customers were charged very high commissions and paid substantial interest on the financing of those commissions.

That is four times the number of Swiss franc borrowers. Why is that fewer than it sounds?

Mainly because there are far more consumer-loan agreements than Swiss franc mortgage contracts. Figures of more than 10 million, or even 20 million, active consumer loans are often cited. But that does not mean the free-credit sanction will affect the same share of the market as Swiss franc mortgages did. At Helpfind, we look only at agreements in which consumers incur high financing costs related to financed commissions or insurance premiums. We are not talking about people who took out a loan yesterday, received the money today and come to us the day after tomorrow saying they want an interest-free loan.

Settling with customers at the complaint stage? A good move

Banks may still be able to stem the tide. Poland’s Financial Ombudsman is encouraging them to reach settlements with customers already at the complaint stage. Most no longer charge interest on financed commissions, while some are refunding interest collected after the CJEU ruling.

That is a good move. We are pleased that our actions have also contributed to this change. Banks should refund excessive commissions where the conditions for the free-credit sanction are met, but they should do so properly. The question is whether banks should even wait for customers to file complaints before making such refunds.

That is not the answer I expected. After all, resolving complaints could prevent court disputes. That undermines your business model.

Yes, it does undermine that business model, but we have other ideas for growth. We also have a long-term mission that is somewhat controversial and paradoxical: to cease to exist. That would mean consumers’ problems had been resolved and properly regulated.

We are pleased that banks are changing their contracts and that some are already refunding money in response to the growing number of cases. It was similar with Swiss franc mortgages. Litigation could have been avoided. Banks could have started settling with customers much earlier.

Let me give you the bankers’ answer: at the time, that could have been seen as acting against the company’s interests, so chief executives were reluctant to return money to customers while the case law was still taking shape.

That is high-level politics. It is not my area. But I do wonder whether, in the case of Swiss franc mortgages, once we factor in the costs of legal services and court representation, it might not have been better to settle with customers at an earlier stage rather than allow cases to drag on in the courts for years.

“Swiss franc mortgages did not stop lending, and neither will the free-credit sanction”

Do you feel responsible for the more than PLN 100 billion in total costs the banking sector has incurred over Swiss franc mortgages? Banks regularly point out how much lending they could have financed with that money.

I do not feel responsible, because that argument is false. Swiss franc mortgages did not stop banks from lending, and neither will the free-credit sanction. These issues certainly help bring more order to the banking market.

A dysfunctional market?

No, it is not dysfunctional. Polish banks are highly digitized, and we have access to a wide range of financial instruments. Banks in Poland did not push customers into the kind of credit-card problems seen abroad, for example in the United States, nor into expensive car loans with low down payments – and that deserves recognition. The point, however, is not to abuse the advantage banks have over customers or hide unfavorable provisions in contracts.

How many Swiss franc mortgage cases did you handle?

Since 2019, we have acquired 160,000 clients in total, equivalent to about one-quarter of the entire market. We were one of the companies that contributed significantly to the development of this market in Poland. We worked with more than 30 law firms, to which clients’ cases were subsequently referred.

Are Swiss franc borrowers still coming to you, or are you already withdrawing from this segment?

New cases are still coming in, but the issue is now nearing its end. I would point out that the banks’ narrative that Swiss franc borrowers have come out as winners is not entirely accurate. They may have won financially, but we should remember that they had to sue. This is Poland, not the United States. As Poles, we are not a society particularly inclined to litigate. We have many clients who genuinely live through these cases. They experience every stage intensely and become anxious because the success rate is still not 100%. For them, it is an enormous burden, often lasting for years.

Helpfind sees potential in helping pensioners, among other areas

But you started in a completely different industry: insurance. How did that come about?

It grew out of my own observations and experience. I come from the insurance industry, where I worked on building insurance-comparison websites. I saw how customers were treated and how payouts under third-party liability and comprehensive motor insurance policies were understated. That is the area in which we are now the market leader. We operate in a similar way in property insurance, helping people who have suffered losses, for example after their apartment has been flooded. There are also insurance-based investment products, which still exist, although they are discussed less often these days. There is a very large volume of litigation in this area, far more than in the credit market. It is worth looking, for example, at PZU’s reports [the biggest Polish insurer, state-owned – ed.] and checking how many cases before courts, arbitration bodies or public authorities involve entities belonging to that group alone.

So mainly banking and insurance?

Not only. Another area is helping pensioners seek recalculation of their pensions and obtain back payments. This is based on a Constitutional Tribunal ruling that found that the rules under which ZUS, Poland’s Social Insurance Institution, had calculated some pensions for years were unconstitutional. We bring these cases against the State Treasury. We are also looking at the market for transmission easements.

What is the potential there?

Considerable. An estimated more than 20 million plots of land in Poland are used to varying degrees for transmission infrastructure. This includes electricity, gas, water and telecommunications infrastructure, much of which was built over decades without the legal status of the land being properly regulated. Such cases can involve claims worth tens of thousands of PLN, and sometimes even more.

“Thanks to Swiss franc mortgage cases, customers are no longer afraid of going to court”

How do you find customers?

We operate online, and that is how we acquire customers. We build consumer awareness through online campaigns, collect data and documents through our platform, and support customers with a call center team of more than 150 people. We run a wide range of advertising campaigns and are also present in the media. We operate a number of websites, not all of them under the Helpfind brand, because we create separate sites devoted to specific consumer issues. Anyone interested in our services can always speak with us, upload their agreements to our systems and complete the entire process online.

So you do not make cold calls?

No, we do not. Just look at Swiss franc mortgages: the first educational materials and campaigns on the issue were prepared mainly by us and Votum. We educated customers. Now, after the experience of Swiss franc mortgage disputes, customers know they can work with companies such as ours. They are no longer afraid of going to court. Nor are they afraid of taking on a much larger opponent, namely a financial institution. For years, there was little awareness of which products customers were being treated unfairly on and when they could enforce their rights. Now we tell customers to review the products they have and check whether they are overpaying anywhere. We show them that pursuing claims does not have to be expensive and that it is possible to win against a much larger opponent.

Helpfind’s R&D team has identified 20 products with potential

From what you are saying, I gather that mass consumer litigation has a bright future ahead of it.

It will certainly remain a feature of the market. We are expanding our R&D team and monitoring different products and market segments. We have currently identified 20 types of mass-market products where, in our view, financial products were missold or customers are overpaying for services. One Pandora’s box we are trying to open is agreements with non-bank lenders. This concerns tied selling and so-called value-added services, or VAS, which have attracted scrutiny from bodies including UOKiK. We also see highly problematic practices in this market.

What will that mean for the group’s results? Is PLN 500 million in revenue by 2030 within reach?

That is quite a distant horizon, but I would be comfortable with that figure. The most important thing is that we are pursuing diversification, so we will not depend on a single business line.

And that means you will not be badly affected if the Justice Ministry restricts the free-credit sanction under the legislation it is currently working on?

We would certainly feel the impact. But I think lawmakers and regulators understand that consumers need mechanisms and tools of this kind if we want to provide them with an adequate level of protection. The mechanism was, after all, also intended to serve a preventive and deterrent function, encouraging lenders to comply strictly with statutory requirements. We are creative entrepreneurs.

We have not even touched on international expansion yet, and there is potential there too. The United States looks interesting, while in Europe we see opportunities in Romania and Bulgaria. In the latter two countries, we often encounter the same banking groups as in Poland. The same is true of insurance companies. Their ways of operating can also be similar. Over the past eight years, 1.7 million customers have passed through our systems. That shows how much awareness has grown that institutions of public trust have not always treated their customers properly.

Key Takeaways

1. Helpfind is scaling its business through the international litigation-finance model. Helpfind generated PLN 122 million (about EUR 28.3 million) in revenue in 2025, while 1.7 million customers have passed through its systems. According to its CEO, the company was the first in Poland to adopt the litigation-finance model and has so far worked with four foreign funds. “The banks won’t wear us down by dragging cases out,” says Konrad Piechota.
2. Helpfind accounts for nearly half of Poland’s free-credit sanction lawsuits. The company is behind almost half of the 34,000 free-credit sanction cases filed in Poland, having previously acquired clients representing around one-quarter of the Swiss franc mortgage litigation market. It estimates that around 2 million people may be affected by high commissions and the interest charged on financing them. The CEO says that banks currently win around 50% of second-instance proceedings in cases involving Helpfind.
3. Helpfind’s R&D team is analyzing 20 types of products, while the company is planning international expansion. According to its CEO, reaching PLN 500 million (about EUR 115.9 million) in revenue by 2030 is realistic. Diversification, overseas growth and scrutiny of 20 areas for issues including misselling and excessive customer costs are expected to support that target. Loan agreements offered by non-bank lenders could prove to be a new “Pandora’s box.” The company is also examining claims related to transmission easements.