7 Amendments of Pascal CANFIN related to 2010/0373(COD)
Amendment 42 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) In some Member States specific direct debit transactions exist which seem very similar to payment card transactions given that the payer uses a card at the point of sale to initiate the payment transaction. However, the underlying payment scheme is a direct debit. The card is only used for a read-out in order to facilitate an electronic generation of the mandate, which has to be signed by the payer at the point of sale. Because of its substantial transaction volume, such payment services cannot be classified as a niche product but even so are in need until an adequate SEPA substitute is available. In this regard, stakeholders are requested to develop an adequate SEPA substitute, which shall be approved by the Commission, before the existing national direct debit schemes that enable these kind of transactions are phased out.
Amendment 43 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20
Recital 20
(20) In order to ensure that redress is possible where this Regulation has been incorrectly applied, Member States should establish adequate and effective out-of- court complaint and redress procedures for settling any dispute arising therefrombetween payment service users and payment service providers.
Amendment 46 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) The European Payment Council (EPC) has had an overwhelming influence on the governance of SEPA. Currently, the banking industry dominates the EPC, which has lead to an exclusion of user interests in the decision- making process on SEPA. Therefore, a reform of SEPA governance is necessary to ensure that this decision-making process will be more democratic and transparent.
Amendment 47 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 a (new)
Article 5 a (new)
Charges Where the payment service user is a consumer, a payment service provider shall not levy higher inflation-adjusted charges for credit transfers and direct debits for a period of [10] years from the date referred to in Article 5 paragraph 1 and 2 than it has levied on that payment service user for corresponding or in terms of conditions and technical requirements comparable credit transfers and direct debits of the same value under national payment schemes on 1 December 2010.
Amendment 48 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 b (new)
Article 5 b (new)
Member States shall ensure that in case of a direct debit, a payer is entitled to a refund from his payment service provider of an authorised payment transaction initiated by or through a payee which has already been executed. The refund consists of the full amount of the executed payment transaction. Within 30 business days of receiving a request for a refund, the payment service provider shall refund the full amount to the value date of the refunded payment transaction.
Amendment 52 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. The payment service providers of the payer and the payee shall not levy any charges or other fees on the read out process, which provides the data for those payment transactions initiated through or by means of a payment card at the point of sale, which result in direct debit.
Amendment 53 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) the arrangement shall be aimed at efficiently allocating costs to the party thatprovide that payment service providers collect the resulting fee with the payment initiating payees only; this is without prejudice on a duty of the payer to refund this fee to the payee, if the payer is to blame to hasve caused the R-transaction, while taking into account the existence of transaction costs andithout proper reason reflecting the duties arising of the paid contract as well as the aim of consumer protection