In recent years consumers have learned to get banks to compete when they get a mortgage, but with regard to basic banking services they are less likely to consider alternatives. It is not good for the financial services field either that consumers get stuck as one bank's customers and mobility is reduced. No progress has been made with account number portability lately. It was therefore encouraging to read recommendations to improve the transparency of financial markets and consumers' mobility in a study conducted by the Nordic Council of Ministers. Proposed measures included developing online calculators to help compare costs and improve comparability in general. A recommendation according to which banks would inform customers annually how much they had paid for basic banking services during the year is appealing. This could spur competition. In order to stimulate competition in the electricity field an online tool maintained by the Energy Market Authority that shows actors' prices has been introduced. Blurring transparency in customer loyalty schemes in which products in different fields are linked should be prevented by prohibiting the linking of banking services with customer loyalty packages altogether. The question is whether people really want to increase transparency.
The old class action debate is under way again. Now that business's concerns are breaking down one after another, the discussion has focused on whether a consumer authority can really do something about the offering of securities with a class action. Thinking is always good but in this case doubting is not: in matters involving securities consumers' need for protection is real and presently consumers cannot even take these matters to the complaint board. In Germany it has been argued that class actions are needed particularly in securities matters. In Finland critics fearing the consumer authority have gone so far that the report of a working group on prospectuses completely dismisses class actions as a means, although the goal was to bring clarity to the jungle of rules concerning compensation for damage. On top of everything the report goes way outside the working group's mandate and recommends that for clarity's sake the Consumer Ombudsman's authority should be changed by excluding securities matters from it. Perhaps the working group thought that compensation matters would be clarified best by weakening consumer protection.
In addition to saving, people are busy borrowing. Now people who have lost their credit ratings are being offered the possibility to obtain a foreign credit card. Refusing credit automatically because of a single bad credit record is not always justified and inflexibility opens the door for other actors. On the other hand granting credit in a situation where one bad credit record follows another raises the question of the creditor's responsibility in new credit payment difficulties. Responsible lending cannot be managed just by tightening credit terms. The matter will be looked at from different angles in Brussels at a conference in late April that will bring together people from around Europe to consider ways to increase responsibility in lending and cooperation among different parties. The conference will be preceded by a series of discussion sessions in different parts of Europe. The Consumer Agency will also arrange a meeting for Finnish actors around this theme.
Anja Peltonen
Editor-in-Chief, Director of the Consumer Law Division