Activites

• 1997/06/04 Final act published in Official Journal
  • Directive 1997/7
  • OJ L 144 04.06.1997, p. 0019
• 1997/05/20 Final act signed
• 1997/05/20 End of procedure in Parliament
• 1997/01/23 Decision by Council, 3rd reading
• #1985
• 1997/01/20 Council Meeting
• 1997/01/16 Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading
  • T4-0008/1997 summary

    In adopting the report by Mrs Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN (PPE, NL), Parliament approved the joint text for a Directive designed to give the consumer better protection against the possible abuses of distance contracts. Improvements resulting from the compromise between the Council and Parliament within the Conciliation Committee include: - telephone calls: the identity of the supplier and the commercial purpose of the call must be made clear at the beginning of any conversation with the consumer, in order that the latter may have the requisite information at the outset to hang up if he or she so wishes. - Where a supplier uses distance selling techniques involving an advance payment, he must furnish not only his name but also his address. - Right of withdrawal: the consumer will have a period of not less than seven working days in which to withdraw from the contract without penalty and without giving any reason. The only costs payable are the cost of returning the goods, i.e. the postal charges. - Information: the consumer should be informed 'in a clear and comprehensible manner' (i.e. not in small print) of the possibility for the supplier to provide the consumer with goods or services of equivalent quality and price (e.g. red pullovers instead of green pullovers). - Penalties: if the supplier has failed to fulfil the obligations inherent in the contract, the consumer should be reimbursed as soon as possible. Contracts for the supply of foodstuffs, beverages or other goods intended for current consumption supplied to the consumer's home, residence or workplace are included in this provision of the Regulation. The same applies to contracts for the provision of services, at a later date, with respect to accommodation, transport and catering. Finally, the Regulation lays down that Member States should take the necessary measures to protect consumers against contracts providing for certain means of communication for contacting them. Member States should, for example, act to protect consumers who do not wish to receive intrusive advertising. �

• 1997/01/15 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

    The rapporteur, Mrs Oomen-Ruijten, welcomed the Conciliation Committee’s draft, which would protect consumers from the misuse of distance selling techniques. Many of Parliament’s amendments had been taken over, particularly with regard to telephone calls, right of withdrawal, information and penalties should the supplier fail to fulfil its obligations. She also mentioned the progress made on the legal action which consumer organisations could take. Although the directive had not been extended to financial services, the rapporteur placed her confidence in Commissioner Bangemann who, on behalf of the Commission, had undertaken to present legislation on financial services and distance selling. Commissioner Bangemann replied by referring to the Green Paper which would be presented for debate by Parliament. In the meantime, he pointed out that the international conventions on financial services should be applied.

• 1997/01/13 Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading
  • A4-0009/1997
• 1996/11/27 Final decision by Conciliation Committee
  • 3636/1996
• 1996/10/01 Formal meeting of Conciliation Committee
• #1904
• 1996/02/26 Council Meeting
• 1995/12/13 Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading
  • T4-0601/1995 summary

    In adopting the report by Mrs Ria OOMEN-RUIJTEN (PPE, NL), the European Parliament amended the common position of the Council as follows: - the scope of the directive includes contracts concluded for the construction and sale of immovable property (except for rental), but excludes contracts relating to financial services; - prior to conclusion of the contract, the consumer must be supplied with the identity and address of the supplier; - the consumer should have a period of at least seven working days in which to withdraw from the contract without penalty and without giving any reason. The only costs payable would be the direct charges; - where the right of withdrawal has been exercised, the consumer should be reimbursed within thirty days; - in the case of contracts of an indefinite duration concerning the supply of services or products to be performed permanently or recurrently, the conditions under which the contract can be annulled must be clearly indicated; - the prior consent of consumers is necessary before they can be approached by telephone: in such cases, suppliers must disclose their identity and state their intentions at the beginning of each telephone conversation; - Member States must take the necessary measures effectively to protect those consumers who have indicated that they do not wish to be solicited against such soliciting; - consumers must be informed of the provisions of this directive and of the existence of the codes of practice in this field; - an effective scheme to deal with cross-border complaints should be set up; - the Member States shall have two years to implement the provisions of the directive. Within a period of four years the Commission must present a report on the implementation of this directive and on any relevant new proposal. �

• 1995/12/11 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

    The rapporteur, Mrs OOMEN-RUIJTEN (EPP, NL), wanted to determine the guarantees for the protection of consumers in cross-border distance contracts. She was worried about the gaps in the Directive on this matter and quoted as an example the distance selling of organised travel. After a television advertisement, consumers knew which agency was organising the travel and the price, but there could be fraudulent use of their payment cards. She also hoped that Amendment No 15 would be taken over as it enabled consumers to withdraw from a contract within seven working days without penalty and without giving any reason. Finally, with regard to financial services, Mrs Oomen-Ruijten called on Parliament to support Amendment No 7 in order to include financial services in the scope of the Directive. The Commissioner, Mrs BONINO, stated that the Commission could take over 25 of the 44 amendments tabled. Firstly, with regard to financial services (Amendment No 7), the Commission would present a communication accompanied by an action plan, and perhaps a proposal for a directive, in February. She also agreed to include in the scope of the Directive contracts concluded for the construction and sale of immovable property, except for rental (Amendment No 8), and tourist services (Amendment No 9). However, she rejected Amendments Nos 6 and 10 on the definition and on the address of the supplier. She also rejected Amendment No 11 and hoped that the Member States’ jurisdiction alone would be responsible for ‘those who are unable to give their consent’. She did not agree with Amendment No 13 on the durable medium, which gave rise to the somewhat delicate problem of whether or not the information stored in a computer memory was equivalent to that transmitted in writing. However, Mrs Bonino supported the procedure of customers giving their consent prior to being contacted by telephone or electronic mail. In her view, this would provide a fair balance between the needs of businesses and the rights of consumers. Finally, she agreed with the amendments aimed at enabling public bodies and consumer organisations to take legal action (Amendment No 30), and concerning the burden of proof of the supplier (Amendment No 31). She also took over the following amendments: 1, 3 to 5, 12, 15 to 17, 23 and 24, 32, 33, 35 and 36 (the last two with improved wording).

• 1995/11/21 Vote in committee, 2nd reading
  • A4-0297/1995
• 1995/09/21 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 2nd reading
• #1862
• 1995/06/29 Council Meeting
  • 07623/2/1995 summary

    The Council's common position incorporated, in full or in part, the European Parliament's amendments included in the Commission's amended proposal. The main amendments introduced by the Council related to the following points: - withdrawal of the approach concerning "contract solicitation", which proved to be inappropriate with respect to distance contracts; - use throughout the directive of the terms "distance contracts" instead of "contracts negotiated at a distance"; - removal of the definition of an "order"; - limitation of the definition of an "operator" to only those persons making one or more means of distance communication available to suppliers, since it was their practices that needed to be regulated; - withdrawal and referral to national legislation of the performance of a split contract; - with regard to exemptions, exclusion from the scope of the directive of contracts relating to financial services, contracts concluded at an auction and contracts concluded through the use of public payphones; - distinction between prior information and written confirmation of information; - in the case of communication by telephone (with the exception of automatic calling machines) and electronic mail, the principle of prior consent did not apply; - strengthened provisions linked to the execution of the order (execution no later than 30 days following the date on which the order was forwarded); - with regard to payments, the text did not prohibit prior payments but it stipulated that the supplier should refund the amount paid by the consumer in the case of withdrawal or non-execution of the contract. The text also included a more general provision concerning any form of fraudulent use of payment cards, leaving open the means for recrediting the sums due; - clarification of the provisions concerning the right of withdrawal and the exclusion of contracts relating to: services, if performance had begun with the consumer's agreement; immovable property; audio or video recordings, computer software; newspapers, periodicals and magazines; gaming and lottery services; - relaxation of the provisions concerning judicial actions on the part of consumer organisations: (a) legal action at national level was left to the discretion of the Member States; (b) the provision concerning cross-border legal action was removed; - finally, reference in the minimal clause to the ban on the marketing of medicinal products, without limiting it to only those medicinal products delivered on prescription. �

• #1838
• 1995/03/30 Council Meeting
• 1993/12/02 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T3-0683/1993 summary

    In its first reading under the codecision procedure, the European Parliament confirmed its vote of 26 May 1993. �

• 1993/11/24 Committee report tabled for plenary confirming Parliament's position
  • A3-0365/1993
• 1993/11/24 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
• 1993/10/07 Modified legislative proposal published
  • COM(1993)0396 summary

    In its modified proposal, the Commission reflected a number of amendments by Parliament. The principal changes to the initial proposal relate to the following points: - The right of consumers to undertake cross-border operations is more clearly apparent in the recitals. - In response to the concern expressed by Parliament regarding the prohibition of distance selling of medicinal products, a recital has been introduced recalling that the Member States have various means for intervening both under this Directive and under Directives Nos 89/552/EEC (televised advertising) and 92/28/EEC (advertising of medicinal products for human use). - A number of definitions have been clarified: the contracts in question are those concluded in the context of a system for selling or rendering services. As far as the supplier is concerned, the text adopts the definition used by the Directive on unfair terms (No 93/13/EEC). The question of which forms of advertising constitute solicitation is made clear. - Exemptions: goods such as made-to-measure articles and reservation services cannot be excluded from the scope of the Directive. However, goods of this type cannot be subject to a cooling-off period enabling the consumer to change his mind (exemption from the right of cancellation). - In the case of certain telecommunications technologies (fax, electronic mail, telephone and automatic calling machines), the prior consent of the consumer is required. - The obligation to inform the consumer of the content of the solicitation is reinforced by a reference to the right of cancellation and an indication of the VAT costs. The obligation to inform is also broadened in cases of televised solicitation. - No payment may be required of the consumer before the goods are delivered or the service rendered. - In the event that the supplier cannot supply the goods or service ordered but supplies equivalent goods or an equivalent service of the same quality and at the same price, this does not constitute unsolicited supplying. - Provision has been made for mutual recognition of legal proceedings instituted by professional or consumer organisations. This mutual recognition is confined to those States which accept this type of action. Furthermore, the Directive makes it possible for the courts to order that the dissemination of solicitations be discontinued. - If the consumer discovers a defect in goods after the end of the cooling-off period, he retains his rights to compensation. - Finally, it is desirable for the consumer to be informed of the existence and content of the codes of practice intended to supplement the Directive. �

• 1993/05/26 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T3-0321/1993 summary

    Parliament adopted the report by Mrs Ria Oomen-Ruijten, in particular amendments 19 on the elements that must be included in contract solicitation, 20 on television solicitation and 34 on the period during which consumers can withdraw from the contract. �

• 1993/05/25 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament summary

• 1993/05/07 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A3-0159/1993
• 1992/07/10 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 1992/05/20 Legislative proposal published
  • COM(1992)0011 summary

    PURPOSE: the approximation of Member States’ legislation concerning contracts negotiated at a distancePROPOSED ACT: Directive of the European Parliament and of the CouncilCONTENT: This proposal seeks: to harmonise Member States’ legislation concerning the negotiation of contracts at a distance between consumers and suppliers, as well as contract solicitation and other preparatory actions; and to establish a minimum basis of protection for consumers for what concerns contracts negotiated at a distance. The proposal covers the distance selling of contracts for all goods and services.  However, provisions are made for certain exceptions.  These include, in particular:- an obligation for the supplier to provide certain information to the consumer. Some of this information must be provided at the time when the consumer is solicited, while other information must be provided at the point in time when the contract is concluded. - the possibility for the consumer to cancel a credit card operation carried out at a distance if there are reasons to question the validity of the operation.

• 1992/05/15 Additional information

Documents

• Legislative proposal published: COM(1992)0011
• Committee report tabled for plenary, 1st reading/single reading: A3-0159/1993
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T3-0321/1993
• Modified legislative proposal published: COM(1993)0396
• Committee report tabled for plenary confirming Parliament's position: A3-0365/1993
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T3-0683/1993
• Council position published: 07623/2/1995
• Committee recommendation tabled for plenary, 2nd reading: A4-0297/1995
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 2nd reading: T4-0601/1995
• Joint text approved by Conciliation Committee co-chairs: 3636/1996
• Report tabled for plenary, 3rd reading: A4-0009/1997
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 3rd reading: T4-0008/1997
• : Directive 1997/7
• : OJ L 144 04.06.1997, p. 0019

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)