Activities of Louis GRECH related to 2011/0373(COD)
Reports (1)
REPORT on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (Directive on consumer ADR) PDF (690 KB) DOC (1 MB)
Amendments (18)
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 7
Recital 7
(7) This Directive should apply to contractual disputes betweeninitiated by consumers andgainst traders that are arising from the sale of goods or provision of services in all economic sectors. This should include complaints submitted by consumers against traders but also, both offline and online, including the supply of digital content for remuneration, in all economic sectors. This Directive should not apply to non economic services of general interest, which are not performed for financial gain. This Directive should not apply to any disputes or complaints submitted by traders against consumers. This Directive should not apply, or to disputes between traders; however, ithis Directive should not prevent Member States from adopting or maintaining in force provisions on procedures for the out- of-court resolution of such disputes.
Amendment 158 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Member States should ensure that the contractual disputes covered by this Directive can be submitted to an ADR entity fulfilling the requirementscomplying with the quality criteria set out in this Directive. Member States shcould have the possibility talso fulfil this obligation by relybuilding on existing well-functioning ADR entities and adjusting their scope of application, complying with this Directive's provisions if needed, or by providing for the creation of new ADR entities. This Directive should not oblige Member States to create a specific ADR entity in each retail sector. Member States should have the possibility to provide for the creation of a residual ADR entity that deals with disputes for the resolution of which no specific entity is competent, in order to ensure full geographical coverage and access to alternative dispute resolution in all Member States.
Amendment 167 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) The natural persons in charge of alternative dispute resolution should only be considered impartial if they cannot be subject to pressure that potentially influences their attitude towards the dispute. There is a particular need to ensure the absence of such pressure where ADR entities are financed by one of the parties to the dispute or an organisation of which one of the parties is a member. Therefore procedures where the natural person in charge of the dispute resolution is employed by or receives other forms of remuneration exclusively from the trader should not be regarded as ADR procedures within the meaning of this Directive and hence should be excluded from its scope of application. However, this Directive should not affect the possibility for business or professional associations to fund an ADR entity.
Amendment 179 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) ADR procedures should be free of charge or of moderate costs for consumers so that it remains economically reasonable for consumers to use such proceduresfor the consumer. In the event that costs are applied, they should be reasonable, proportionate and modest to ensure that the ADR procedure is accessible, attractive and at a low cost.
Amendment 181 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) ADR procedures should be fair so that the parties to a dispute are fully informed about their rights and the consequences of the choices they make in the context of an ADR procedure. The ADR entities should inform consumers of their rights under legal provisions before they agree to or reject the imposed or proposed solution. Both parties should also be able to submit their information and evidence without being physically present.
Amendment 183 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 a (new)
Recital 21 a (new)
(21 a) An agreement between a consumer and a trader to submit complaints to an ADR entity should not be binding on the consumer if it was concluded before the dispute arises and if it deprives the consumer of his right to bring an action before the courts for the resolution of the dispute. In the case of ADR entities which impose solutions, the solutions should only be binding on the parties if they were informed of binding nature in advance and specifically accepted this, with the exception when national rules provide that solutions shall only be binding on traders.
Amendment 189 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 21 b (new)
Recital 21 b (new)
(21 b) In the case of ADR procedures which impose binding solution on consumers, the latter should be afforded at least the same level of protection as the one laid down by the mandatory provisions applicable under the law of the Member State in the territory of which the ADR entity is established. In the case of cross-border disputes, the solution imposed by the ADR entity should not result in the consumer being deprived of the protection afforded by the mandatory provisions applicable under the law of the Member State in which the consumer has his habitual residence.
Amendment 200 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23 a (new)
Recital 23 a (new)
(23 a) In order to reduce unnecessary burdens on ADR schemes, Member States should encourage consumers to attempt to resolve the dispute amicably with the trader before referring their complaints to an ADR entity or court. In cases where consumers are required to first make contact with the trader before referring their complaints to an ADR entity, Member States shall ensure that once the consumer has contacted the trader, the trader must provide its answer within a maximum of twenty working days and in the absence of a response or if the parties fail to reach an amicable solution, the consumer can then forward the complaint to an ADR entity. Individual companies' in-house complaint schemes can be effective in resolving complaints and avoiding escalation of disputes at a later stage. Member States should be able to maintain or introduce national provisions relating to internal complaint procedures.
Amendment 202 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 23 b (new)
Recital 23 b (new)
(23 b) Member States should be free to maintain or introduce minimum thresholds for the value of an admissible ADR claim, without setting a threshold that would restrict consumers' access to ADR procedures.
Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a directive
Recital 27 a (new)
Recital 27 a (new)
(27 a) Providing ADR entities with a European quality label should increase European citizens' trust and confidence in the quality of the ADR system, especially when buying across borders. An easily recognisable European quality label, regularly monitored and supervised by the Member States and the European Commission, should guarantee consumers that the relevant ADR entity complies with the quality criteria set out in this Directive.
Amendment 254 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 5 – paragraph 1
Article 5 – paragraph 1
1. Member States shall ensure that disputes covered by this Directivefacilitate access by consumers to ADR procedures and shall ensure that disputes covered by this Directive which involve a trader established on its territory can be submitted to an ADR entityies which compliesy with the requirementsquality criteria set out in this Directive if both the trader and the consumer agree to do so.
Amendment 282 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) possess the necessary proven knowledge, skills and experience in the field of alternative dispute resolution;
Amendment 286 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Article 6 – paragraph 2
Amendment 287 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Member States shall ensure that the natural person in charge of alternative dispute resolution discloses any factors that could affect their impartiality or give rise to a conflict of interest through a personal, business or financial relationship with any of the parties, or any other interest in the outcome of the ADR procedure
Amendment 289 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 6 – paragraph 2 b (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 b (new)
2 b. Member States shall ensure that appropriate training is available for the natural persons in charge of alternative dispute resolution in order to ensure high quality dispute resolution across the Union. The development and implementation of such schemes will be supported by the Commission.
Amendment 297 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point e
(e) the rules of procedure governing the resolution of a dispute; and the reasons for which an entity may refuse to deal with a dispute;
Amendment 312 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) the ADR procedure is preferably free of charge for at moderate costs for consumersthe consumer or, if not, at a nominal cost;
Amendment 354 #
Proposal for a directive
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a (new)
Article 9 a Liberty 1. Member States shall ensure that the decision taken by the ADR entity shall be binding on the parties only if they were informed of its binding nature in advance and specifically accepted this, with the exception when national rules provide that solutions are only binding on traders. 2. Member States shall ensure that an agreement between a consumer and a trader to submit complaints to an ADR entity is not binding on the consumer if it was concluded before the dispute arises and if it deprives the consumer of his right to bring an action before the courts for the resolution of the dispute.