Towards better allocation of household budgets

This month a Working Group Report on Transparency in EU Retail Energy Markets was released, specially for the 5th Citizens' Energy Forum. The report aims to enable more consumer empowerment with respect to well-informed choice of how to allocate household budgets. (p. 4) In that respect, it addresses and evaluates the European energy policy from the perspective of its influence on consumers. (p. 5)

 

"With this in mind, EU energy policy measures have been developed with the aim of delivering meaningful and tangible benefits for consumers. In particular, internal energy market legislation combines high standards of consumer protection with the liberalisation of gas and electricity (wholesale and retail) markets. The rationale behind this dual focus is to establish the basis for creating choice and price competition for consumers without compromising their rights in any way." (p.5)

 

Some of the shortcomings of the policy that have been identified in the report are the difficulties in exercising choice and finding offers that are meaningful to consumers, especially household consumers. For many consumers the liberalised energy market is too complex and difficult to take part in. The EU should try to offer not only a legal right to consumers to choose their energy supplier, but also to enable them exercising this right and provide them with more gains, in terms of price and quality, for doing so. In that respect, consumers need to be made more aware of their rights and be encouraged to participate in the market. (p. 6) 

 

Consumer organisations note, e.g., that introduction of smart technologies and demand response policies may complicate the tariffs systems. Policy makers should make sure that the trend to tariff simplification is upheld. (p. 7) The report notices that the main problem currently relates to lack of transparency (reliable and timely information is a rarity) and price formation.

 

The report further presents a short summary of European and national legislation on electricity and gas supply to consumers, marketing of such services as well as pre-contractual information that needs to be provided to consumers. (chapter 2) Chapter 3 addresses consumer understanding of offers and marketing, pointing out major issues and good practices, e.g. how to assess consumers' cognitive skills. Chapter 4 focuses on enforcement issues, addressing the role of national authorities. Chapter 5 recommends new policy measures to improve transparency.

Green paper on cross-border parcel delivery

The European Commission has just launched a consultation with stakeholders to collect information on the current state of the delivery markets for products bought online, and to identify any potential hurdles for the creation of an EU-wide integrated parcel delivery market. 

The consultation is open to not only to businesses, but to "virtually everyone who sends or receives parcels". In order to encourage participation of stakeholders (potentially, most of us)respondents do not need to answer every question but can choose the issues that interest them. 

Delivery services are already regulated at the European level, but the concerned legislation was not conceived to explicitly address the modern needs of consumers who buy online.Contributions can be submitted by 15 February 2013. They will later be published on the Commission's website and the Commission will present actions to be taken as "to complete the internal market for parcels". 

For some relevant fats and figures, have a look at the Commission's memo.

Improving data protection in the EU

On the 19th of November the European Commission adopted a recommendation according to which it would be able to renegotiate the Council of Europe Data Protection Convention, Convention 108, on behalf of the EU. The goal is to increase the current level of protection of fundamental rights offered in processing of personal data. This change would go hand in hand with the planned reform of data protection rules (see: here). The European Commission hopes also to export the EU's standard of data protection beyond Europe. (Commission to renegotiate Council of Europe Data Protection Convention on behalf of the EU)

A few days later, on the 23rd of November, the European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) adopted a Policy on Consultations in the field of Supervision & Enforcement. This policy points out to EU institutions and bodies, as well as Data Protection Officers (DPOs) when to consult the EDPS when they draft any rules involving processing of personal information (e.g., contract tenders, requests for information, video surveillance etc.). The aim of the policy is to better protect personal data of the EU staff but also of EU citizens (consumers) in procedures that take place at a higher level of administration.

Giovanni Buttarelli, Assistant EDPS, says "In order to effectively respect the fundamental right to data protection of staff and citizens, EU institutions and bodies must ensure accountability when developing and implementing internal measures and from the outset, seek the expert advice of their Data Protection Officer. If the DPO needs guidance, for example in cases of complexity or when related to appreciable risks to the rights and freedoms of data subjects, the DPO or the institution may refer a consultation to the EDPS." (EDPS: greater accountability of EU institutions and bodies and involvement of DPOs for better data protection)

Better Internet for Children

The Council of the EU adopted at a meeting yesterday its conclusions on the European strategy for a Better Internet for Children. (see our earlier posts on this subject: Children Online, or EU needs to better monitor this new reality, or Big online wolf) It endorses European Commission's proposal while recommending actions to be taken in the areas of: assuring more quality of online content for children (understood as the content that benefits children in some way in addition to being attractive, usable, reliable and safe); stepping-up awareness and empowerment (e.g. by including the teaching of online safety and digital competences in schools; by further developing media literacy; by improving parental control tools). The Council expects the final report on this subject from the Coalition in January 2013.

A year after EU action: from 30 to 75% of compliant websites offering consumer credits online

Last week the follow-up results of a Consumer Credit sweep from 2011 were made public. A 'sweep' is an exercise to enforce EU law. Under a supervision of EU institutions, national enforcement authorities conduct simultaneous, coordinated investigations - looking for breaches in consumer law in a particular sector. In case any irregularities are discovered, website operators are contacted and asked to correct them. In September 2011 it was time for examination of websites offering consumer credits to consumers. In total, 565 websites across 27 Member States, Norway and Iceland were checked. Unfortunately, at that time only 30% passed the test for compliance with the applicable EU consumer rules (e.g. regarding information duties, right of withdrawal). Out of the remaining websites: "A year later, 57 additional sites were finally considered to be compliant, 18 websites no longer exist, 194 websites were corrected following action by the national authorities and 124 websites are still the subject of administrative or legal proceedings in the countries concerned." (Buying consumer credit on-line: following EU action, over 75% of websites checked now give satisfactory information to clients) As a result of European intervention of the percentage of websites that comply with consumer protection rules has significantly increased, since only ca 23% of websites remain questioned as to their compliance. The main problems that were reported was missing information in consumer credit advertising (e.g. on the APR - annual percentage rate of change, or on standard information) or in the offer itself, as well as misleading presentation of the costs (e.g. type of interest rate, duration of the credit). See further here.

Protecting privacy while collecting debts - CJEU in C-119/12 (Probst)

The CJEU issued one more judgment today regarding consumer protection in the case C-119/12 (Probst). This case concerns interpretation of Art. 6 Par. 2 and 5 of the Directive on privacy and electronic communications. Specifically, the question was whether a service provider is allowed to transfer traffic data to the assignee of a claim for payment in respect of telecommunication services, especially when in addition to the general obligation to respect the privacy of telecommunications and to ensure data protection of consumers' data, other confidentiality stipulations have been made.

Mr Probst, a German consumer, was the owner of a telephone line provided by Deutsche Telekom AG, through which his computer connected to the internet. In 2009 he occasionally accessed internet through the number provided by Verizon. Deutsche Telekom listed these charges as 'amounts due to other providers' on its bills. Since Mr Probst did not pay these amounts, they were later claimed by nexnet - as asignee of that debt pursuant to a factoring contract concluded between the legal predecessors to Verizon and to nexnet.

The CJEU decided that indeed such transfer 'of traffic data to the assignee of its claims for payment in respect of the supply of telecommunications services for the purpose of recovery of those claims' as well as 'authorising that assignee to process those data' was allowed. Provided that the assignee 'acted under the authority of the service provider' and 'confined itself to processing the traffic data necessary for the purposes or recovering the claims assigned'. The contract concluded between the service provider and the assignee had to guarantee that the processing of traffic data by the assignee would take place exclusively under the control of the service provider and on its instructions. (Par. 27) The CJEU decided that in the given case it was for the national court to decide whether these conditions were fulfilled, however, a factoring contract that was concluded between the parties suggested that this was the case. (Par. 28)

Two more decisions concerning air passengers

Today, the Court of Justice of the EU has released two judgements which European consumers/travellers might want to know about. 

In the first one, Case C-139/11 (Joan Cuadrench Moré v KLM), it established that, in the case of passengers seeking damages for the cancellation of a flight under Regulation 261/2004, the time-limits for bringing an action are to be determined by the Member States in accordance with the principles of effectiveness and equivalence in relation to the procedural rules laid down by national law in respect of similar situations. Since the Regulation put in place a system of protection that is additional to those laid down in the Warsaw and Montreal Conventions, the two-year time-limit provided by those treaties does not apply.

In the second decision, Case C-410/11 (Pedro Espada Sánchez and Others v Iberia), the Court was called to interpret the just-mentioned Montreal Convention, or the Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage, to which the EU has adhered. 

The question concerned a family of four people (a Spanish couple and their two children) whose luggage went lost during a flight operated by Iberia. The Montreal Convention provides that an air carrier must pay compensation to each passenger, in the event of the loss of his baggage. In the claimants' case, the luggage of all four passengers had been put in two suitcases. The question before the Court, subsequently, was whether it was possible for the family to also claim damages for the luggage which had been not checked in under the requesting passenger's name. 

The court answered that, in light of the Convention's objectives, it must be possible for a passenger to claim damages for the loss of luggage which had been checked in under another passenger's name. The claimant must prove that the lost baggage did in fact contain his belongings. In making its assessment, the national court may take into account the fact that the concerned passengers are members of the same family, that they bought their tickets together or that they checked in at the same time.

Better information on delayed train connections - CJEU judgment in Case C-136/11 Westbahn Management v ÖBB Infrastruktur

This morning, the Court of Justice of the EU handed down its judgment in the Westbahn case. The Court reaches conclusions similar to those of the Advocate General (discussed earlier on this blog: 'Better information on delayed train connections - opinion of AG Jääskinen'). As summarised in the press release:

'Railway undertakings are therefore obliged to provide information relating to the main connecting services in real time.

The Court finds that that obligation relates to all main connecting services, both those of the railway undertaking concerned and those operated by other undertakings. A restrictive interpretation of the information to which passengers must have access would hinder transfers by them. It would compromise the objective of providing information pursued by EU law, by encouraging passengers to give preference to large railway undertakings which would be in a position to provide them in real time with information relating to all stages of their journey. 

As to the obligations of the railway infrastructure manager, the Court observes that, to ensure fair competition on the passenger rail transport market, it must be ensured that all railway undertakings are in a position to provide passengers with a comparable quality of service. Railway undertakings must therefore, for the purposes of the exercise of the right of access to railway infrastructure, be given information by the infrastructure manager in real time relating to the main connecting services operated by other railway undertakings. 

In this connection the Court notes that information which is available on screens at the various stations cannot be regarded as being of a confidential or sensitive nature which would prevent its disclosure to the various railway undertakings concerned. 

The Court therefore holds that the infrastructure manager is required to make available to undertakings, in a non-discriminatory manner, real time data relating to trains operated by other undertakings, in so far as those trains provide main connecting services.'

European fees for card payments?

Another resolution that was adopted yesterday by the European Parliament concerned EU rules for card payments and aimed at further harmonising cross-border payments. Moreover, it could remove fake fees - that unnecessarily make payments with cards more expensive in relation to their actual cost. Interestingly, the MEPs believe this could be achieved just by introducing transparency in the market, since competition would take care of properly set fees then (no need for capping). All in all, the MEPs argue for common rules for personal credit and debit card payments, which rules could be based on the ones developed for cross-border bank transfers (SEPA - single Euro payments area). The MEPs also looked ahead and expressed a less urgent need to unify the rules for internet and mobile payments in the future, as well. (Towards common fees for card payments)

Big online wolf

One of the most controversial issues regarding the safety of internet users and their privacy online is the protection of children online. While children use internet more and more often ("All young Europeans aged 9 to 16 use a computer to play or do their homework, and half of those between 11 and 16 say they find it easier to express themselves on line than in real life, according to a survey done in the member states.", see: Parliament calls for better protection for children), they may be faced with internet fraud, online violence, pornography, harassment etc.

Yesterday, the European Commission Vice President for the Digital Agenda - Neelie Kroes - and the US Secretary of Homeland Security - Janet Napolitano - signed a Joint Declaration promising to safeguard children in their online endeavours. The promises stretch to organising, annually, joint campaigns on the Safer Internet Day, further combating child sexual abuse online worldwide, working on giving parents and guardians informed choices online as to the content their children are able to access. (EU and US sign joint declaration to make the internet safer for kids) Interestingly, on the same day the European Parliament adopted a resolution in which it calls for better protection for children online, arguing for an increase of educational campaigns about digital media, as well as easier and more accessible means to report online abuse.