6 Amendments of Ashley FOX related to 2011/2010(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Believes that the adoption of a commona common framework for Insurance Guarantee Schemes (IGSs) at EU levelcross the EU and the adjustment of the diverse IGS regimes existing in Member States would effectively improve citizens' confidence, protect consumers' and taxpayers' rights and enhance market stability, in the insurance sector in particular and in internal market and financial services in general; therefore welcomes the Commission's initiative to establish an IGS at European level common framework;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Acknowledges that the most realistic and useful approach at the moment is the establishment of a coherent and legally binding framework of IGS protection based on minimum harmonisation, which should not undermine the protection already offered by some Member States, with a view to achieving maximum harmonisation at a latehilst important consumer provisions should be harmonised to maximum level, including the home Member State principle, compensation limits and payout period for estageblished and quantified claims;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Argues that in order to ensure comprehensive protection for policyholders and beneficiaries, the IGS should not be the last-resort mechanism, and urges the Commission to retain and take into account other existingConsiders that the function of an IGS should be a mechanism of last resort in order to provide continuity of protection for policyholders and beneficiaries; believes that an IGS should be able to intervene when other protection mechanisms have failed;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that future IGSs should be based on the home Member State principle for cross-border insurance branches and provide a high degree and equal level of consumer protection for all natural persons – whether policyholders or other beneficiaries – covered by all types of insurance contract (life and non-life), especially in the event of insurer bankruptcy, insurer or intermediary mis- selling, or fraud;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that the IGSs should give policyholders an opportunity to choose between financial compensation and transfer of their insurance contract; considers that EU law on IGSs should ensure swift maximum compensation for non-life compulsory insurance and 90% of the amount of cost of losses in life and non-compulsory non-life insurance, or a portfolio transfer, where appropriate, whereby the policyholder would not suffer any loss of rights and privileges emanating from the policy;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that funding arrangements for IGSs should be based on both ex-ante and ex-post funding; recognises that failing insurance companies should also have contributed to the contingency funding which should be in place in case of insurer failuredetermined by national authorities; considers it necessary to await the outcome of the wider debates at European level on funding requirements for insurance entities before such arrangements are determined;