Submission #15

Primary tabs

View(active tab)

AFUB (Association française des usagers des banques)

Question 1: Do you consider the objectives of the Guidelines as identified by the EBA to be plausible and complete? If not, please provide your reasoning.

The AFUB-FBUA (French Bank Users Association) expresses its approval of the objectives and means deployed in order to achieve transparency and confidence in the relevant sectors on behalf of the consumers.

Question 2: Do you agree with the options the EBA has chosen regarding the identification of payment services by the applicant; the way information is to be submitted to the competent authority; the four-part structure of the Guidelines, and the inclusion of authorisation for electronic money institutions? If not, please provide your reasoning. No comment.

Question 3: Do you consider it helpful how the EBA has incorporated proportionality measures in the Guidelines in line with PSD2? If not, please explain your reasoning and propose alternative approaches. No comment.

Question 4: Do you agree with the Guidelines on information required from applicants for the authorisation as payment institutions for the provision of services 1-8 of Annex I of PSD2, as set out in chapter 4.1? If not, please provide your reasoning. No comment.

Question 5: Do you agree with the Guidelines on information required from applicants for registration for the provision of only service 8 of Annex I PSD2 (account information services), as set out in chapter 4.2? If not, please provide your reasoning.

The AFUB-FBUA (French Bank Users' association) agrees with the Guidelines on information required from applicants for registration of the provision of the service of account information services as set out in 4.2. However, our organisation believes that the guidelines should be modified as follows:

1) The modalities of the periodical statistical appreciation permitting to determine the number (or percentage) of incidents in comparison with the total number of operations; that is including those with and without incidents should be included;

2) Additionally, the modalities and delay of response in relation with complaints of customers should be specified.
Our organization advocates this position, as requesting precisions regarding the monitoring and management of the risk of fraud will not permit the competent authority to control the concerned establishment’s compliance with the relevant requirements.

Effectively, since the directive DSP 2 2015/2366/UE, in the case of a fraud, the establishment must reimburse IMMEDIATELY the victim. This assumes that the control is exercised on this issue.
An engagement relating to the timing of the management of complaints would thus ensure compliance on behalf of the Account information Service providers regarding consumers.
Therefore, the establishment must commit to specify the delay by which it engages itself to fulfill its obligations towards the consumers.

Question 6: Do you agree with the Guidelines on information requirements for applicants for authorisation as electronic money institutions, as set out in chapter 4.3? If not, please provide your reasoning. No comment.

Question 7: Do you consider the Guidelines regarding the assessment of completeness of the application, as set out in chapter 4.4 to be helpful? If not, please provide your reasoning. No comment.

Name of organisation AFUB (Association française des usagers des banques)