Activities of Phil PRENDERGAST related to 2013/2122(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on misleading advertisement practices PDF (170 KB) DOC (83 KB)
Amendments (9)
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas misleading marketing practices can take many forms, with the most prominent being misleading directory company schemes where a rogue company sends out forms inviting businesses to complete or update their business name and contact details, seemingly for free; whereas signatories later discover that they have, in fact, unintentionally signed up to a contract, normally binding them for a minimum of three years, to be listed in a business directory at a yearly charge of up to EUR 1000 or more; whereas false payment forms are another significantly damaging practice;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas these practices go underreported, as victims of misleading marketing practices often feel ashamed and refrain from reporting such practices to enforcement authorities or comply with payment demands; whereas in view of this it is extremely important that those authorities facilitate reporting and give sufficient priority to such cases;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas therogue traders exploit the greatly uneven level of protection for businesses varies greatly among Member States, with only Austria and Belgium having included a specific ban on misleading directory schemes in their legislation, while the Netherlands is currently preparing a similar law;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas at present rogue traders are very difficult to trace and prosecute, as they often send invoices from one country to another while their bank account is in yet another country, thus also making money transfers difficult to trace;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
G a. whereas, owing to their small scale and limited resources, it is often unfeasible for SMEs, and microbusinesses in particular, to individually mount legal challenges against rogue traders established in a different jurisdiction;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the need for national enforcement authorities to work more closely together with enableproviders whose services are used by perpetrators of misleading marketing practices, such as banks, telephone companies, postal services and collection agencies, in order to help prevent rogue companies from operating;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Regrets the Commission's failure to take up Parliament's recommendation for a partial extension of the scope of the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive by having Annex I (the blacklist) cover business-to- business (B2B) contracts; considers that amending this directive instead of Directive 2006/114/EC will result in a more coherent approach since it will extend the concept of unfair commercial practices, together with the blacklist, to B2B relations; stresses that this will avoid the need for broadening the concept of misleading advertising, which is necessary in order to capture all forms of misleading practices; emphasises the importance of an exhaustive and clearly defined blacklist of misleading marketing practices for effective enforcement and legal certainty;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Draws attention, in particular, to the role played by fraudulent debt collection agencies which do not hesitate to put pressure on businesses to pay invoices which they know or could have known to be fraudulent; calls on the Commission and the Member States to propose means of better controlling such agencies, both before and after their formal establishment, and also to consider the possibility of introducing a mandatory requirement for debt collection agencies to report misleading practices;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Calls on Member States to facilitate, through their legal systems, the practice of private enforcement, whereby business associations and other relevant organisations are empowered to mount legal challenges against rogue traders;