Full report (pdf) - Centre Européen de la Consommation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -• Countries with no ADR existing:• Some countries do not have an ADR able tohandle APR cases:• These countries are Austria, Bulgaria, Ireland,Romania, Slovakia, the United Kingdom, andsince the 1st January 2012, the Netherlands asthe Consumer Complaint Board for Aviationstopped its activity (see box 1).Consequently, in these countries, consumersdo not have any access to an ADR entity in theAPR sector. If they have a complaint, they willhave to turn directly to the company or invoke acourt procedure to try and enforce their passengerrights.• ADR with a general competence (not solely for APRor travel cases)• Many EU countries as well as Iceland have anADR entity with a general competence whichtherefore also includes disputes concerning APR(Czech Republic, Cyprus, Denmark (ConsumerComplaints Board), Estonia, Finland, Germany(Online-Schlichter), Greece, Hungary, Italy with“RisolviOnline”, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Portugal,Poland and Spain).• In Sweden, even though the consumer mustturn to a general ADR entity which can intervenein any consumer sector, the ADR providesa specific travel department, handling travelrelated cases including APR cases.• In Germany (Online-Schlichter), Hungary, Spainand Portugal, the competence of the ADR entityis limited to a specific region.• In some cases its competence depends onthe value of the complaint (Cyprus, Denmark(Consumer Complaints Board) and Portugal).The competence of the CACCL (Centro de Arbitragemde Conflitos de Consumo de Lisboa), forexample, is limited to the Lisbon district and toconsumer complaints of under 5000 € (there isalso a national arbritation centre, whose territorialcompetence covers the regions in the mainlandand Azores Autonomous Region wherethere is no other competent arbritation center).The Danish Consumer Complaints Board is empoweredto hear complaints relating to goodsor services that cost at least DKK 80 (approx. 105€). The upper limit for all cases is DKK 100 000(approx. 13 400 €).• The value of complaint must not exceed 3000 €in Cyprus and 30000 € in Germany (SöP).NL: Functioning of the former ComplaintBoard for APR claims in The NetherlandsOn January 1st 2012, the activity of the Consumer ComplaintBoard for Aviation stopped its activity due to the Dutch Boardof Airline representatives (BARIN) withdrawing its cooperation.This ADR was notified with the European Commission andevery member of BARIN was participating in the ADR process,even the low cost airlines. The Complaint Board worked witha Commission of which half of the representatives wereconsumers and the other half consisted of representatives fromairlines.The ADR decision was binding for the companies.The board published several of its decisions, guaranteeing thatthe parties remain anonymous.The role of this Complaint Board was distinct from the role ofthe NEB.Restrictions: this procedure was not free of charge forconsumers and the competence was limited to flights leavingfrom a Dutch airport.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Example of a specific ADR for APR claims:Flyklagenemnda in NorwayNorway is one of the only countries to have a specificADR for air passenger claims, competent for disputes relating toscheduled air traffic. However, it can also handle claims againsttravel agencies or airports if they are linked to the applicationof the EU Regulation 261/2004. This ADR was established by apublic initiative and is notified with the European Commission.The Board is financed by a fee imposed by the Ministryof Transport, which is paid by all airlines operating fromNorwegian airports. In 2009, the fee was 0,20 NOK (approx.0.03 €) per passenger travelling from a Norwegian airport. Theprocedure is free for consumers.The airlines participate in the procedure. The consumer invokesthe procedure with his claim; the secretary of the Board asksfor the airline’s position. The answer is communicated to theconsumer for comments and then the whole file is submitted tothe Board for a decision, which will be communicated to eachparty. The decision is not binding for the airline but in case theairline does not adhere to it, the case is published in a specificsection on the Board’s website.During the procedure, in order to complete the file beforecoming to a decision, the ADR can benefit from the expertiseand cooperation of the NEB (CAA) in Norway.- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Example of an ADR set by an airline:Alitalia’s mediatorThis is the only example among all of the European airlinesin which a company has set up a Mediation service for itscustomers.Alitalia has signed a complaint handling protocol with the majorItalian consumer associations. The conciliation is managed bythe signatory consumer associations and the airline.With the help of the ECC Italy, the scheme has been improvedover the years. Even if the issue raised concerning theindependence of the scheme has not yet been completelyclarified, the ADR has demonstrated its genuineness and effortin regard to the handling of cases and in helping consumersfind amicable solutions in cases where the customer service hasgiven a negative answer to the consumer or has not answeredthe consumer’s complaint within a pre-established time limit.Advantage: transparency for the consumer by the written rulesof procedure and amicable settlements even if no legislativeprovisions are applicable to the case.Disadvantage: third part missing7- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -