What changed

From · act followup · 2024-07-22 SP-2024-350-TA-9-2024-0139 Follow up to T9-0139/2024

→

To · opinion parliamentary committee · 2024-02-28 TRAN-AD-758110 on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/11/EU on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes, as well as Directives (EU) 2015/2302, (EU) 2019/2161 and (EU) 2020/1828

+235 added · −9 removed · 0 modified paragraphs hide unchanged text

~~ORDINARY LEGISLATIVE procedure~~

PA_Legam

~~(First reading without prior interinstitutional negotiations)~~

SHORT JUSTIFICATION

Follow up to the European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Directive 2013/11/EU on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes, as well as Directives (EU) 2015/2302, (EU) 2019/2161 and (EU) 2020/1828

Adopted in 2013, the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Directive aimed at fair, fast and affordable out-of-court resolution of domestic and cross-border disputes between EU consumers and traders. Based on a minimum harmonisation approach, it caters for the varying ADR cultures and national frameworks across the different Member States. While ADR is not meant to replace court litigation, it is considered an effective redress mechanism to resolve low-value disputes, as resorting to court is more costly and often much more time-consuming. However, so far success of ADR in the EU has only been partial, its setup and efficiency often depending on the national context of each Member State. As a consequence, today there is a significant share of EU consumers who are not aware of or do not trust ADR schemes and, subsequently, abstain from complaining. Moreover, 43% of retailers in the EU are unaware of the existence of ADR as a means to resolve their disputes with consumers.

~~1. Rapporteur: Laura BALLARÍN CEREZA (S&D / ES)~~

In view of the above, your Rapporteur welcomes the Commission proposal to amend ADR Directive in order to make the framework fit for digital markets, to enhance the use of ADR in cross-border disputes and to simplify ADR procedures. While generally endorsing the proposal, your Rapporteur would like to accentuate several aspects below.

~~2. Reference numbers: 2023/0376 (COD) / A9-0060/2024 / P9_TA(2024)0139~~

Your Rapporteur supports retaining the minimum harmonisation approach in the proposal, not least in view of a still fragmented ADR landscape in the EU Member States as well as time and effort necessary to ensure seamless ADR across the EU. While recognising that certain sectors are significantly more dispute-intensive than others – indeed, transport and tourism being one of them – your Rapporteur would like to remind that the 2013 Directive already provided for a degree of flexibility for the Member States to decide whether trader participation in ADR should be mandatory or voluntary in sectors they deem fit. Having said that, whenever traders refuse to participate in an ADR procedure, they shall be required to provide written explanations.

~~3. Date of adoption of the resolution: 13 March 2024~~

One of the main objectives of the Commission proposal is to enhance the use of ADR in cross-border disputes through more customised assistance to consumers and traders. However, real-life examples show that ADR accessibility in cross-border disputes remains problematic, including in terms of language and applicable law. Achieving this objective will require focusing on providing ADR entities with sufficient knowledge, expertise and resources. Furthermore, currently many ADR entities operate on the basis of a general competence, with only a few Member States having ADR entities specialising in disputes related to travel and passenger rights. Therefore, your Rapporteur would like to encourage specialisation of ADR entities, especially in the fields of transport and tourism, traditionally yielding high numbers of consumer complaints, including training of those in charge of ADR in relevant sectorial legislation to anticipate the best solutions of cross-border consumer complaints.

~~4. Legal basis: Article 114 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union~~

One of the basic principles of ADR is the good will of the parties – consumers and traders – to cooperate in finding an amicable solution to a dispute, its premise being awareness of the advantages of the ADR mechanism. Therefore, it is important to build incentives for traders to join the ADR schemes, informing them about benefits thereof: confidentiality, avoiding the risk of adverse publicity and reputational damage that could arise from a court case; deciding the outcome themselves rather than having it imposed on them; and flexibility in terms of the outcome, including achieving outcomes that a court could not order, or a result that the parties think is fairer than that dictated by law. At the same time, it is crucial to enhance consumer awareness of and strengthen their trust in ADR, especially when resolving cross-border disputes. In this connection, your Rapporteur takes notice of numerous unregulated claims management companies, offering mediation in solving passenger air claims online for private profit, and stresses that, unaware of existence of the ADR entities or not trusting them to be independent and/or impartial, consumers tend to resort to the former. Indeed, as only a number of Member States have smoothly functioning ADR schemes, focusing on the quality (independence, impartiality, expertise, resources) of ADR entities, on information and assistance to consumers as well as on enhancing take-up rates of dispute resolution is crucial.

~~5. Competent Parliamentary Committee: Committee on Internal Market and Consumer Protection (IMCO)~~

While welcoming the Commission proposal to establish ADR contact points with clearly defined tasks, your Rapporteur points out that European Consumer Centres that are well placed to perform such tasks, should work in cooperation with national ADR competent entities. Moreover, considering the cross-border nature of passenger and traveller rights, the Commission should work closely with European Consumer Centres, travel and tourism businesses, consumer organisations and other entities dealing with consumer rights, to promote best practices and knowledge needed to remove the obstacles faced by consumers and traders when using ADR procedures in the field of transport and tourism.

~~6. Commission's position: takes note of the amendments proposed by the European Parliament, while reserving its detailed position on these until the opening of interinstitutional negotiations.~~

Finally, your Rapporteur broadly supports the Commission proposal to enable ADR entities to bundle similar cases against specific trader in cooperation with the national ADR competent authorities or the European Consumer Centres Network, as such a possibility would allow for representative action and ensure consistent ADR outcomes subjected to the same unfair commercial practices.

AMENDMENTS

The Committee on Transport and Tourism calls on the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, as the committee responsible, to take the following into account:

Amendment 1

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2) In 2019 the Commission adopted a report on the implementation of the Directive 2013/11/EU and of Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council2 which revealed that Directive 2013/11/EU has led to increased coverage of consumer markets by quality ADR entities throughout the Union. However, the report also identified that consumer and business uptake of ADR procedures was lagging behind in some sectors and Member States. One reason for this was the low level of awareness of traders and consumers about such procedures in Member States where they had only recently been introduced. Another reason was the lack of trust of consumers and traders in unregulated ADR entities. Data provided by national competent authorities in early 2022, as well as the evaluation of the implementation of the Directive 2013/11/EU conducted in 2023, suggest that the uptake remained relatively stable (apart from a small increase of cases related to Covid-19 pandemic). Most stakeholders consulted in the context of that evaluation confirmed that the lack of awareness and understanding of ADR procedures by consumers, low engagement by traders, gaps in ADR coverage in certain Member States, high costs and complex national ADR procedures and differences in the competences of ADR entities, are frequent factors hindering the uptake of ADR procedures. There are additional barriers in cross-border ADR like language, lack of knowledge of the applicable law, as well as specific access difficulties for vulnerable consumers.

__________________

2 Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 May 2013 on online dispute resolution for consumer disputes and amending Regulation (EC) No 2006/2004 and Directive 2009/22/EC (OJ L 165, 18.6.2013, p. 1).

(2) In 2019 the Commission adopted a report on the implementation of the Directive 2013/11/EU and of Regulation (EU) No 524/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council2 which revealed that Directive 2013/11/EU has led to increased coverage of consumer markets by quality ADR entities throughout the Union. However, the report also identified that consumer and business uptake of ADR procedures was lagging behind in some sectors and Member States. One reason for this was the low level of awareness of traders and consumers about such procedures in Member States where they had only recently been introduced. Another reason was the lack of trust of consumers and traders in unregulated ADR entities. Data provided by national competent authorities in early 2022, as well as the evaluation of the implementation of the Directive 2013/11/EU conducted in 2023, suggest that the uptake remained relatively stable (apart from a small increase of cases related to Covid-19 pandemic). Most stakeholders consulted in the context of that evaluation confirmed that the lack of awareness and understanding of ADR procedures by consumers and traders as well as their low engagement, gaps in ADR coverage in certain Member States, high costs and complex national ADR procedures and differences in the competences of ADR entities, are frequent factors hindering the uptake of ADR procedures. There are additional barriers in cross-border ADR like language, lack of knowledge of the applicable law, as well as specific access difficulties for vulnerable consumers. This has contributed to the evolution of the ADR landscape into a variety of different systems in the EU, where – due to the different procedural rules and criteria across the Member States – traders representing complaint-intensive sectors such as transport and tourism, face challenges related to the use of dispute mechanisms in the cross-border context, which need to be addressed to create a more accessible, coherent and effective cross-border ADR framework, fostering trust and cooperation among consumers and traders.

__________________

Amendment 2

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2a

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2a) Transport and tourism sectors are dealing with a high number of consumer complaints, especially related to air passengers rights. This, along with a high number of enquiries on the same issues, shows, on one hand, the existing awareness of the consumer rights framework in this field. On the other hand, this is an indication that ADR procedures should remain the last resort for well-founded consumer complaints before going to court with the aim of defending consumer rights to the fullest.

Amendment 3

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2b

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2b) The focus of this Directive should be on strong incentives for consumers and traders to use ADR procedures. Therefore, in order for it to reach its full potential and deliver for consumers, participation of traders in the transport and tourism sectors could be made mandatory, when stipulated in national legislation of the Member States, provided that such legislation does not prevent the parties from exercising their right of access to the judicial system. In particular, Member States should have a possibility to decide on national legislation to establish ADR systems in the transport and tourism sectors, ensuring equal representation of consumers and traders within the boards of ADR entities and a strong supervisory role of the competent authorities in relation to ADR entities. Where national legislation of the Member States makes the participation in such procedures voluntary, Member States should ensure that traders that choose not to participate are required to make the explanation for such choice publicly available.

Amendment 4

Proposal for a directive

Recital 2c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(2c) Only a number of Member States have a smoothly functioning ADR system. Gaining the trust of consumers and traders in ADR and increasing their participation in ADR procedures, notably related to the transport and tourism sectors, requires ensuring that the functioning and the work of ADR entities are of good quality. In order to enhance the take-up rates of dispute resolution, it is necessary to focus on their independence, impartiality, and resources as well as on the developing of the expertise of the staff of ADR entities in relevant sectorial legislation, such as passenger and traveller rights. To this end, Member States shall encourage ADR entities to provide training for natural persons in charge of ADR in relevant sectorial legislation to support ADR entities in providing the best assistance to consumers in resolving cross-border complaints. Furthermore, staff participating in ADR procedures shall be required to undergo mandatory annual training to ensure that their existing knowledge is kept up to date and in line with recent digital advancements.

Amendment 5

Proposal for a directive

Recital 11

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(11) Member States should also enable ADR entities to bundle similar cases against a specific trader, to make ADR outcomes consistent for consumers subjected to the same illegal practice, and more cost-efficient for ADR entities and for traders. Consumers should be informed accordingly and should be given the opportunity to refuse from having their dispute bundled.

(11) Member States should also enable ADR entities to bundle similar cases, in close cooperation with the national ADR competent authorities and/or the European Consumer Centres Network, against a specific trader, to make ADR outcomes consistent for consumers subjected to the same illegal practice, and more cost-efficient for ADR entities and for traders. Consumers and traders should be informed accordingly and should be given the opportunity to refuse from having their dispute bundled.

Amendment 6

Proposal for a directive

Recital 13

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(13) Under Directive 2013/11/EU, Member States may introduce national legislation to make trader participation in ADR compulsory in sectors they deem fit, in addition to sector-specific Union legislation which provides for mandatory participation of traders in ADR. To encourage traders’ participation in the ADR procedures and to ensure due and swift ADR procedures, traders should be required, especially in cases where their participation is not compulsory, to respond within a specific period to enquiries made by ADR entities on whether they intend to participate to the proposed procedure.

(13) Under Directive 2013/11/EU, Member States may introduce national legislation to make trader participation in ADR compulsory in sectors they deem fit, in addition to sector-specific Union legislation which provides for mandatory participation of traders in ADR. To encourage traders’ participation in the ADR procedures and to ensure due and swift ADR procedures, traders should be required, especially in cases where their participation is not compulsory, to respond within a specific period, not exceeding 15 working days, to enquiries made by ADR entities on whether they intend to participate to the proposed procedure.

Amendment 7

Proposal for a directive

Recital 15

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(15) To provide effective assistance to consumers and traders in cross-border disputes, it is necessary to ensure that Member States establish ADR contact points with clearly defined tasks. European Consumer Centres (“ECCs”) are well placed to perform such tasks, as they are specialised in assisting consumers with issues with their cross-border purchases, but Member States should also be able to choose other bodies with relevant expertise. Those designated ADR contact points should be communicated to the Commission.

(15) In several Member States consumers and traders are still insufficiently informed about the existence of and services offered by ADR entities. To provide effective assistance to consumers and traders in cross-border disputes, it is necessary to ensure that Member States establish ADR contact points with clearly defined tasks. European Consumer Centres (“ECCs”) are well placed to perform such tasks, in close cooperation with national ADR competent entities, as they are specialised in assisting consumers with issues with their cross-border purchases, but Member States should also be able to choose other bodies with relevant expertise and ensure that they have adequate budgetary and human resources. Those designated ADR contact points should be communicated to the Commission.

Amendment 8

Proposal for a directive

Recital 17 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(17a) Traders should provide information about the ADR contact point to consumers on their webpage, to keep up to the current trends of online commerce and functioning of online platforms.

Amdendment 9

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point -1 (new)

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 1

Present text

Amendment

Article 1

Subject matter

The purpose of this Directive is, through the achievement of a high level of consumer protection, to contribute to the proper functioning of the internal market by ensuring that consumers can, on a voluntary basis, submit complaints against traders to entities offering independent, impartial, transparent, effective, fast and fair alternative dispute resolution procedures. This Directive is without prejudice to national legislation making participation of traders in the transport and tourism sectors, among others, in such procedures mandatory, provided that such legislation does not prevent the parties from exercising their right of access to the judicial system. Where national legislation of the Member States makes the participation in such procedures voluntary, Member States shall ensure that traders that choose not to participate are required to make the explanation for such choice publicly available.

Amendment 10

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

1 a. Trader not legally established in the territory of any Member State offering goods or services or marketing in the EU, including digital content and digital services, shall participate in an ADR mechanism and comply with consumer ADR rules.

(This amendment applies throughout the text. Adopting it will necessitate corresponding changes throughout.)

Justification

The amendment broadens the scope of the Alternative Dispute Resolution Directive by including non-EU traders and mandating their compliance with local ADR entities where they offer goods or services in the EU. This move aims to enhance global consumer protection, providing EU consumers with consistent and accessible dispute resolution mechanisms. By harmonizing ADR procedures, the amendment ensures operational consistency and prevents discrimination based on consumers' domiciles. The commitment to additional consumer-friendly measures further underscores the EU's dedication to fostering trust and fairness in cross-border transactions, ultimately strengthening consumer rights within the EU marketplace.

Amdendment 11

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point aa (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(aa) ensure that consumers can submit complaints in the country where he or she resides against traders established outside of their country of residence;

Amdendment 12

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) grant the right to the parties to the dispute to request that the outcome of the ADR procedure be reviewed by a natural person when the procedure was carried out by automated means;

(c) grant the right to the parties to the dispute to request that the outcome of the ADR procedure be reviewed and ensure that it is reviewed by a natural person when the procedure was carried out by automated means;

Amdendment 13

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point d

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(d) may bundle similar cases against one specific trader into one procedure, under condition that the consumer concerned is informed and does not object to that;

(d) may bundle similar cases against one specific trader into one procedure, under condition that the consumer and the trader concerned are informed and do not object to that;

Amendment 14

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point d

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 5 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. Member States shall ensure that traders established in their territories that are contacted by an ADR entity from their country or from another Member State, inform that ADR entity whether, or not, they accept to participate in the proposed procedure and reply within a reasonable period of time that shall not exceed 15 working days. Information of traders to consumers regarding their willingness to participate in the ADR procedure shall be clear, comprehensible and easily accessible, ensuring that consumers are aware of the trader’s stance before concluding the contract. Whenever traders refuse to participate in the ADR procedure, they shall provide a written explanation.

Amendment 15

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 a (new)

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a

Present text

Amendment

(a) possess the necessary knowledge and skills in the field of alternative or judicial resolution of consumer disputes, as well as a general understanding of law;

In Article 6(1), point (a) is replaced by the following:

(a) possess the necessary knowledge and skills in the field of alternative or judicial resolution of consumer disputes, as well as a general understanding of law and expertise, in particular EU consumer law, when dealing with cross-border cases;”

Amendment 16

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 b (new)

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 6 – paragraph 6

Present text

Amendment

6. For the purposes of point (a) of paragraph 1, Member States shall encourage ADR entities to provide training for natural persons in charge of ADR. If such training is provided, competent authorities shall monitor the training schemes established by ADR entities, on the basis of information communicated to them in accordance with point (g) of Article 19(3).

3b. Article 6, paragraph 6 is replaced by the following:

“6. For the purposes of point (a) of paragraph 1, Member States shall encourage ADR entities to provide training for natural persons in charge of ADR in relevant sectorial legislation. If such training is provided, competent authorities shall monitor the training schemes established by ADR entities, on the basis of information communicated to them in accordance with point (g) of Article 19(3).”

Amendment 17

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 14 – paragraph 2

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2. Each Member State shall designate an ADR contact point in charge of the task referred to in paragraph 1. Each Member State shall communicate the name and contact details of its ADR contact point to the Commission. Member States shall confer responsibility for the operation of the ADR contact points on their centre belonging to the European Consumer Centres Network, or, if not possible, on consumer organisations or on any other body dealing with consumer protection.

Amendment 18

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 14 – paragraph 2 a (new)

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

2a. Traders shall provide information about the ADR contact point. Such information must be distinctly presented, separate from other content on the traders' websites, ensuring clear visibility and accessibility for consumers.

Amendment 19

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 14 – paragraph 3 – point c

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

(c) providing the parties with explanations on the procedural rules applied by the specific ADR entities, such as specific timeframes in communication;

Amendment 20

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 20 – paragraph 8

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

8. The Commission shall develop and maintain a digital interactive tool that provides general information on consumer redress and links to the webpages of the ADR entities notified to it in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.

Due to the cross-border nature of passenger and traveller rights, the Commission shall work closely with European Consumer Centres, business from the sector of transport and tourism, consumer organisations and other entities dealing with consumer rights, to promote best practices and knowledge necessary to remove obstacles faced by consumers and traders when resorting to ADR procedure in this specific field.

Amendment 21

Proposal for a directive

Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8a (new)

Directive 2013/11/EU

Article 20 – paragraph 5

Text proposed by the Commission

Amendment

5. Each competent authority shall make publicly available the consolidated list of ADR entities referred to in paragraph 4 on its website by providing a link to the relevant Commission website. In addition, each competent authority shall make publicly available that consolidated list on a durable medium.

8a. In Article 20, paragraph 5 is replaced by the following:

“5. Each competent authority shall make publicly available the consolidated list of ADR entities referred to in paragraph 4 on its website by providing a link to the relevant Commission website. In addition, each competent authority shall make publicly available that consolidated list on a durable medium. Each competent authority shall make publicly available the explanations whenever the traders refuse to participate in an ADR procedure.”

ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR HAS RECEIVED INPUT

The rapporteur has received input from the following entities or persons in the preparation of the opinion, until the adoption thereof in committee:

Entity and/or person

BEUC

APAVT - Associação Portuguesa das Agências de Viagens e Turismo

Ryanair

The list above is drawn up under the exclusive responsibility of the rapporteur.

PROCEDURE – COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Title

Amending Directive 2013/11/EU on alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes, as well as Directives (EU) 2015/2302, (EU) 2019/2161 and (EU) 2020/1828

References

COM(2023)0649 – C9-0384/2023 – 2023/0376(COD)

Committee responsible

Date announced in plenary

IMCO

20.11.2023

Opinion by

Date announced in plenary

TRAN

20.11.2023

Rapporteur for the opinion

Date appointed

Cláudia Monteiro de Aguiar

9.11.2023

Discussed in committee

22.1.2024

Date adopted

14.2.2024

Result of final vote

–:

Members present for the final vote

Magdalena Adamowicz, Izaskun Bilbao Barandica, Karolin Braunsberger-Reinhold, Marco Campomenosi, Ciarán Cuffe, Jakop G. Dalunde, Karima Delli, Mario Furore, Isabel García Muñoz, Jens Gieseke, Elsi Katainen, Elena Kountoura, Bogusław Liberadzki, Benoît Lutgen, Elżbieta Katarzyna Łukacijewska, Marian-Jean Marinescu, Tilly Metz, Caroline Nagtegaal, Philippe Olivier, Rovana Plumb, Bergur Løkke Rasmussen, Dominique Riquet, Massimiliano Salini, Barbara Thaler, Achille Variati, Henna Virkkunen, Petar Vitanov

Substitutes present for the final vote

Pablo Arias Echeverría, Sara Cerdas, Markus Ferber, Roman Haider, Ondřej Kovařík, César Luena, Ljudmila Novak, Inma Rodríguez-Piñero

Substitutes under Rule 209(7) present for the final vote

Alicia Homs Ginel, Moritz Körner, Hannah Neumann, Francesca Peppucci

FINAL VOTE BY ROLL CALL IN COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION

Key to symbols: