Online auction site Catawiki accused of selling fakes, ignoring complaints
Once a trusted marketplace for rare collectibles and vintage items, online auction platform Catawiki is facing a wave of criticism from collectors, former employees, and consumer advocates over widespread misrepresentation, poor quality control, and unresolved complaints.
An investigation by EenVandaag — which reviewed approximately 20,000 listed objects and the backgrounds of 170 self-described experts — reveals that fake or mislabeled items are routinely approved for auction. The platform’s own standards of “expert review” are under fire for prioritizing volume over authenticity, leaving both buyers and sellers exposed.
Rob de Boer, an antiques dealer who has used Catawiki for over a decade, told EenVandaag he stopped buying through the platform after repeatedly seeing ordinary or fake products listed as rare collectibles.
“There are more and more objects being offered that are not rare, not authentic, and often just new items from regular stores,” he said. “You’ll see something labeled ‘authentic Murano glass’ listed for hundreds of euros, while it’s available on Chinese webshop Temu for a few euros. Or you come across lamps that are just from IKEA.”
De Boer said he reported such misleading listings to Catawiki multiple times but received no response. “If you present yourself as a platform for rare objects, then you need to filter out that kind of junk,” he told EenVandaag.
He also noted that sellers frequently conceal defects or charge excessive shipping fees — a violation of Catawiki’s own policies. “The terms say that overpaid shipping costs should be refunded by the seller. But that never happens.”
Erwin Brand, a wine collector who had been satisfied with Catawiki for six years, said he was left frustrated and ignored after a failed order earlier this year. “Part of my order was sent to the wrong address, and I only received half of it,” he told EenVandaag. “I spent weeks emailing with different staff members from various countries. They didn’t understand or take my complaint seriously.” Brand said his support tickets were repeatedly closed without resolution. “It felt unlawful and unjust,” he added.
After leaving negative reviews about the seller, Brand discovered that Catawiki had edited them to ‘neutral’ without his consent. A manager told him the change was made at the seller’s request. Eventually, after over a month of effort, he was refunded — but he now avoids the platform. “As soon as something goes wrong on Catawiki, you’re at the mercy of a helpdesk that doesn’t function. It’s just not worth it anymore.”
The EenVandaag investigation confirmed these experiences are not isolated. Dozens of buyers, sellers, and former Catawiki employees reportedly said the quality of the platform has deteriorated and that the complaint resolution process is inadequate.
A detailed review of Catawiki’s so-called experts revealed that 60 out of 170 had questionable backgrounds, and nine could not be identified online at all. Many experts reportedly evaluate listings far outside their area of knowledge.
“Some experts had to take over categories without any expertise,” one former staff member told EenVandaag. “If you criticize anything, you become the problem.” One ex-expert even described the workplace atmosphere at Catawiki as “toxic.”
Despite Catawiki’s promises of expert verification, the company does not employ certified appraisers. “Catawiki doesn’t work with registered appraisers,” art valuer Willem de Winter, who has over 40 years of experience, told EenVandaag. “The title ‘expert’ sounds nice, but it isn’t protected. They’re just coaches — often without real knowledge of the items.”
De Winter noted that Catawiki approves items based only on photos and seller descriptions. “You can only properly appraise art in person,” he told EenVandaag. “Photos can be manipulated. You miss critical details.”
He also criticized Catawiki’s policy of refusing returns on misrepresented items. “Traditional auction houses usually accept returns if something is wrong. Catawiki doesn’t offer that,” he told EenVandaag.
Consumer watchdog Consumentenbond agrees. “They promote themselves with promises of safety, expert review, and protection against counterfeits — but that’s often an illusion,” said spokesperson Joyce Donat.
According to Donat, both buyers and sellers pay commission fees that supposedly fund these protections. “If you promise something and fail to deliver, you're misleading your customers,” she told EenVandaag.
Catawiki is also allegedly failing to meet its obligations under the European Digital Services Act (DSA), according to Consumentenbond. The law requires platforms to act against misleading or inaccurate listings. “If something from Temu appears on the site, Catawiki is required to remove the listing and fix the problem,” Donat told EenVandaag. “But that rarely happens.”
Customers reportedly often spend months chasing resolution, engaging with multiple customer service representatives without success.
Former employees told EenVandaag that Catawiki’s internal culture prioritizes speed and volume. Management pressures experts to approve large quantities of items quickly, often at the expense of accuracy. “Quantity over quality,” said one former worker.
Meanwhile, the site continues to grow. Originally launched in Assen as a niche platform for comic book collectors, Catawiki now hosts more than 75,000 weekly auctions across various categories, drawing over 10 million monthly visitors.
In a written statement, Catawiki said: “At Catawiki, quality and trust are paramount. We combine technology with hundreds of internal experts who review every object before it appears on the site.”
The company claims it rejects over one million items per year and that all buyers are protected by a “Buyer Protection” system that safeguards purchases against fraud and errors.
Catawiki also cited a growing team and a “rigorous selection process” for experts. “More than 20 million objects have been sold through our platform. Problems are rare, but when they occur, we always take appropriate action.”
The platform declined to address specific questions from EenVandaag about inaccuracies in expert profiles or unresolved customer complaints.
De Boer said the platform could easily improve with stricter quality checks and enforcement of shipping policies. “Those are the most important things,” he told EenVandaag.
