Public Prosecution Service will not investigate alleged home battery fraud
The Public Prosecution Service has dismissed an ACM complaint after consumers submitted more than a thousand reports.
The Public Prosecution Service will not launch a criminal investigation into alleged fraud in the sale of home batteries. According to Radar, the PPS dismissed the complaint filed by the Netherlands Authority for Consumers and Markets because the number of reports would be too large for the available investigative capacity.
In March, the ACM filed a complaint against a network of sellers who, according to the regulator, approached consumers aggressively and possibly misleadingly. Radar reports that the regulator received more than a thousand reports from consumers. According to the broadcaster, the PPS has said it will not launch an investigation.
The complaint was unusual because the ACM generally conducts administrative oversight. The regulator previously said that the companies involved could repeatedly change their names after action had been taken against one of them. As a result, according to the ACM, a network of sellers remained visible without any individual company staying active for long.
Interest in home batteries has increased in recent years, partly because of solar panels and changes in compensation for electricity fed back into the grid. The product is financially complex: returns depend on the purchase price, energy prices, usage, storage capacity and any trading on the electricity market.
The ACM previously warned that sellers often paint an overly rosy picture of the financial returns in telephone conversations and advertisements. The regulator stresses that future energy prices are uncertain and that a battery is not automatically profitable. This general warning is separate from any judgement about each individual provider.
The PPS decision does not mean that the ACM considers the sales practices lawful. It means that there will be no criminal investigation into this complaint. According to the ACM, other avenues remain open to consumers, such as reporting the matter to ConsuWijzer or exercising their statutory consumer rights when buying at a distance.
The case also exposes a structural problem. A regulator can collect many reports, but criminal prosecution requires sufficient leads for an investigation, capacity and evidence against specific suspects. Without further measures, it remains unclear whether the reports will lead to administrative enforcement or civil proceedings.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- The ACM filed a complaint against a network of home battery sellers.
- According to Radar, the PPS decided not to launch a criminal investigation.
- The ACM received more than a thousand reports from consumers.
- The ACM previously warned about misleading expectations of returns.
Left
Arguments The government must actively protect consumers against aggressive sales tactics and should not use a large number of reports as a reason to forgo criminal enforcement. If public regulators lack sufficient capacity, that capacity should be expanded.
Values Consumer protection, equality and responsibility on the part of powerful market players.
Consequences More investigations and stricter rules could keep rogue sellers out, but would entail additional costs for regulators and reputable companies.
Centre
Arguments The PPS must set priorities and use criminal law only when the evidence and capacity offer a realistic prospect of a successful case. At the same time, the ACM and consumer organisations should ensure better case files and administrative enforcement measures.
Values Proportionality, feasibility and a reliable rule of law.
Consequences That could be more efficient, but victims may feel that many reports do not lead to visible enforcement.
Right
Arguments Consumers must remain critical when making major financial purchases, and not every misleading sales issue should immediately be dealt with through criminal law. The energy transition needs room for new products and businesses.
Values Individual responsibility, market forces and restrained government intervention.
Consequences A lighter-touch approach avoids over-regulation, but may leave consumers vulnerable if aggressive sales networks quickly change names.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved with corrections · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The current PPS decision is based on reporting by Radar and not on a document published directly by the PPS. The text makes that distinction explicit and does not present the dismissal as an acquittal or a substantive judgement on all sellers.
- confirmed The PPS dismissed the complaint concerning alleged home battery fraud. — Radar bases this on a letter from the PPS. source
- confirmed The ACM previously filed a complaint against a network of home battery sellers. — The ACM announced this through Radar, and the regulator confirmed its earlier warnings. source
- confirmed The ACM warned about overly rosy expectations of returns. — This is stated in the official ACM warning. source
- confirmed The ACM received more than a thousand reports. — This figure is cited by Radar in its report on the dismissal. source
1 correction(s) applied
- Was: The PPS is stopping the investigation because the sellers caused too many complaints.Now: According to Radar, the PPS dismissed the complaint because the number of reports would be too large for the available investigative capacity. (The dismissal is a capacity decision according to reporting about a PPS letter, not a finding that the sellers are guilty.)
Editor's note
The dismissal was publicly reported by Radar on the basis of communication from the PPS; no separate public PPS decision was found. The background on earlier ACM warnings was, however, checked directly with the regulator.Sources
- OM seponeert aangifte ACM over thuisbatterijen — Radar / AVROTROS
- ACM verklaart in Radar aangifte te doen tegen netwerk aan thuisbatterijverkopers — Radar / AVROTROS
- ACM waarschuwt voor onduidelijke reclames thuisbatterijen — Autoriteit Consument & Markt
More on this in Dutch media
- NOS — „thuisbatterijen acm”
- Het Parool — „thuisbatterijen acm”
- de Volkskrant — „thuisbatterijen acm”