Response to consultation on Guidelines on procedures for complaints of alleged infringements of the PSD2
Go back
We note however that the paper does not specify criteria for the channels. Ease of use will be of particular importance and the Panel would therefore encourage competent authorities (CAs) to give thought as to how all complainants, including vulnerable consumers such as the digitally excluded, will be able to complain. CAs should also review whether the channels available are effective and adjust accordingly.
Harmonising complaints channels across the EU would also be beneficial.
Finally, CAs should respond to complainants in a timely fashion, outline the review process from the outset and give an initial assessment of whether the CA believes there has indeed been an infringement.
The Panel also notes that this information should be stored in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation.
The EBA should also set out provisions for instances in which complainants were not satisfied with how their complaint had been handled by the CA. For example, in the UK, the Complaints Commissioner provides an independent assessment of complaints against the FCA and the PRA.
There would also be value in requiring CAs to notify all EU national authorities and the EBA of the most common and major infringements revealed by their aggregate analysis. This would allow CAs to understand the wider impacts on the EU payments system, act accordingly and avoid widespread consumer detriment.
Finally, the EBA should publish its aggregated analysis on its website and aim to make it available to as many stakeholders as possible.
Question 1: Do you agree with the proposed Guideline 1 on the channels through which complainants should be able to submit their complaints of alleged infringements of PSD2? If not, please provide your reasoning.
Yes. Ensuring that at least two different channels are available for complainants to submit information about alleged infringements, as per draft Guideline 1, will go some way towards to addressing this.We note however that the paper does not specify criteria for the channels. Ease of use will be of particular importance and the Panel would therefore encourage competent authorities (CAs) to give thought as to how all complainants, including vulnerable consumers such as the digitally excluded, will be able to complain. CAs should also review whether the channels available are effective and adjust accordingly.
Harmonising complaints channels across the EU would also be beneficial.
Finally, CAs should respond to complainants in a timely fashion, outline the review process from the outset and give an initial assessment of whether the CA believes there has indeed been an infringement.
Question 2: Do you agree with the proposed Guideline 2 on the information to be requested from the complainant when the complaint is submitted, and to be recorded by competent authorities, as and when provided? If not, please provide your reasoning.
Yes.The Panel also notes that this information should be stored in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation.
Question 3: Do you agree with the proposed Guideline 3 on reply to complainants? If not, please provide your reasoning.
Yes. For an effective framework for PSD II infringement complaints to be established, it is particularly important for CAs to respond to complainants in a timely fashion, and clearly set out the review process and associated timeline. Without this there is a risk that complainants, especially retail consumers, are likely to be discouraged from complaining. The CA should also give an initial assessment of the complaint to determine whether there has been an infringement of the Directive.The EBA should also set out provisions for instances in which complainants were not satisfied with how their complaint had been handled by the CA. For example, in the UK, the Complaints Commissioner provides an independent assessment of complaints against the FCA and the PRA.
Question 4: o you agree with the proposed Guideline 4 on aggregate analysis of complaints of alleged infringements of PSD2? If not, please provide your reasoning.
Yes. Breaking down the information to reveal the nature of the most common types of complainants; the identity of the payment service providers that are most often complained about and the identification of the issues most complained about will help national authorities identify any issues and act on them before it causes further detriment.There would also be value in requiring CAs to notify all EU national authorities and the EBA of the most common and major infringements revealed by their aggregate analysis. This would allow CAs to understand the wider impacts on the EU payments system, act accordingly and avoid widespread consumer detriment.
Finally, the EBA should publish its aggregated analysis on its website and aim to make it available to as many stakeholders as possible.