25.1.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC19/111
APPENDIX 11
totheOpinionoftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
ThefollowingamendmenttotheDraftOpinion,tabledinaccordancewiththeRulesofProcedure,was
defeatedinthecourseofthedebate:
Page5
Insertthefollowingparagraph :
'4.2.7.TheESCcallsontheCommissiontomakethegrantingoffinancialaidmorelinearandlessselective,
withamaximumdeviationdownwardsfromtheaverageideallineardistributionoftheorderof15%,except
whereanactivityofthe3rdFrameworkProgrammehasbegunsorecentlythatexpenditurehasbeensmall:
thatis«MeasurementandTesting"and«HumanCapitalandMobility».'
Reasons
ThedistributionproposedbytheCommissionisextremelyselective,andthiswillgiverisetolegalproblems
duringtheprocedurefortheapprovaloftheappropriations ,particularlyincaseswherethereisnounanimity
amongtheMemberStates.
Voting
For:26;against:29;abstentions :8.
OpinionontheproposalforaCouncilDirectiveontheprotectionofconsumersinrespect
ofcontractsnegotiatedatadistance(distanceselling)(j)
(93/C19/28)
On10June1992theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle100aoftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity,onthe
abovementioned proposal.
TheSectionforProtectionoftheEnvironment ,PublicHealthandConsumerAffairs,which
wasresponsibleforpreparingtheCommittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon
4November1992.TheRapporteurwasMrBonvicini.
Atits301stPlenarySession(meetingof24November1992),theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionbyalargemajoritywithfiveabstentions .
upcodesofpracticesupplementing theminimumrules
onspecificpoints.1.Background
1.1.Theproposalformspartofconsumerprotection
policy,andistheresultoflengthyconsultationswith
consumerassociationsandsectoralorganizations (Con­
sumers'ConsultativeCouncil,CommitteeonCom­
merceandDistribution).
1.2.Followingthesediscussions,theCommission
haspresentedaframeworkdirectivelayingdownmini­
mumprotectionrules,accompaniedbyaRecommen­
dation(2)whichcallsonthetradeorganizationstodraw1.3.TheCommissionhasthuschosenamiddlepath,
leavingasavoluntarymattertheregulationofsensitive
points(solicitationtobuy,protectionofconsumerpriv­
acy,salespromotionmethods,financialguarantee,
rightofwithdrawalandreimbursement ofanyadvance
payments),butguaranteeing aregulatoryreference
frameworktoprotecttheconsumer.(!)OJNoC156,23.6.1992,p.14.
(2)OJNoL156,10.6.1992.

NoC19/112 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 25.1.93
2.Featuresofthesector negotiations .Morefavourableprotectionprovisions
shouldbesafeguardedbymakingitclearthatthe
Directiveissettingminimumharmonization standards.
2.1.TheCommission'sexplanatorymemorandum
containsadetailedanalysisofthedistancesellingsec­
tor—whichisparticularlywelldevelopedintheFederal
RepublicofGermany,FranceandtheUnited
Kingdom—andchartsthelegislationadoptedsince
1987.3.4.Financialguaranteesareaparticularlydelicate
point,andnationalrulesdiffer.Belgium,theNether­
landsandPortugalprohibitdemandsforadvancepay­
menteitherinfullorinpart,whileforadvertisements
appearinginthepresstheUKhasguaranteefunds
financedbybusinessesinthesector.Otheroptions
involveinsurance,tieddepositsandpenaltiestoprotect
theparties.2.2.Thesectorisrelativelynewbutisexpanding
rapidlythankstouseofnewcommunications technol­
ogies.Its.distinctivefeaturessetitapartfromtraditional
typesofsellingsuchasdoor-to-doorormail-ordersales
whichalreadyhaveasignificantturnoverintheirown
right.3.5.Thesepenaltiesshouldalwaysbebasedonthe
sizeofthedeposit,andcouldinvolveeitheradeduction
oranincreaseatanagreedpercentage,dependingon
whoistheinjuredparty.
2.3.Takingadvantageoftheflexibilityofferedby
newformsofcommunication ,evenquitesmallfirms
withnooverseasofficescantargetconsumersinother
MemberStatesmoredirectly,thusextendingconsumer
choice.3.6.Inconclusion,thediversityofpracticesandcus­
tomsmaymakeitdifficulttodecidewhatisthebest
commoninstrument,andadvisabletoleaveregulation
oftheproblemforthemomenttovoluntarycodesof
practice;butitisneverthelessnecessarytosafeguard
theprincipleofthefinancialsecurityofthecontracting
parties.2.4.Hencethesectorisalreadyasignificantone.
Theexpansionofelectronicsellingtechniques,which
arenowopentoalargenumberofmanufacturing and
servicecompanies,islikelytogiveitafurtherboost.
3.Generalcomments3.7.Accordingly,theCommitteeconsidersthata
Directivedefiningminimumrulesforconsumerprotec­
tionisthemostappropriateinstrument .Howeverit
suggeststhatcertainprinciplesenshrinedintheRec­
ommendation bementionedinthepreamble.Itisthink­
inginparticularoftheprinciplethattheconsumer
shouldbeprotectedagainstthefinancialrisksensuing
fromfailuretofulfilthecontract,andagainstfraudu­
lentpracticesthataredamagingtoboththeconsumer
andthesectorasawhole.3.1.Rulestomakedistancesellingmorereliableare
notonlyintheinterestsoftheconsumer—whowants
tobeprotected—butalsoofthefirmsconcerned,since
itcanonlyenhancetheircredibilityandthushelpthem
toboosttheirturnover.
3.8.ItisalsoclearthatiftheDirectiveoperatesin
tandemwithaRecommendation oncodesofpractice,
theconsumershouldbeguaranteedappropriateinfor­
mationonthecontentofcodesdrawnupbythepro­
fessionalassociations .Consumerorganizations could
helphere.3.2.Moreover,newcommunications technologies
makethesectorparticularlywell-suitedfortransna­
tionaldevelopment .Itcanwidenconsumerchoice,but
theconsumermustalsobeguaranteedoptimumprotec­
tion.Thepiecemeallegislationinthisfieldrunscounter
totheoperationofthesinglemarketandjustifiesthe
useofArticle100aasthelegalbasis.
3.3.ECharmonization ofprotectionmeasuresispar­
ticularlywelcome,sincenationalrulescannotcoverall
theproblemsfacedbyconsumersintransnational3.9.Article11dealswiththerightofwithdrawal ,
operativeduringthecooling-offperiodaccordeduncon­
ditionallytotheconsumerbydistance-selling contracts.
Thisrightshouldbekeptdistinctfromthepossibility

25.1.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC19/113
ofrescindingthecontractafterthecooling-offperiod
incasesoffraudorfailuretocomplywiththecontract.
3.10.Intheeventofthelatter,legislationonunfair
tradepracticesandmisleadingadvertisingwillobvi­
ouslycomeintoplay.Theobligationtobefairmeans
thatthenatureoftheproductbeingsold(ifitismovea­
ble)anditsorigin,qualityandquantitymustcorre­
spondwiththosedeclaredorstipulated.Iftheproduct
isafoodstuff,itmustbewholesome .Lastly,theobli­
gationmustcoverthename,brandnameordistinctive
marksoftheproductwhichmustnotmisleadthe
consumerastotheoriginorqualityofthegoodor
service.
3.11.Thespecificproblemsoftheproductsandser­
vicessold,andthevarioussalestechniquesused,can
bedealtwithinthecodesofconduct.Statesalreadyoperatesafeguardssuchas'priorconsent'
or'statementofrefusal'(theUKMailPreferenceService
andFrance'sStopPublicite).
4.4.Theinformationtobesuppliedtotheconsumer
whenhiscustomissolicited(Article6)couldusefully
includedetailsofanyguaranteearrangements ,
especiallytheexistenceofany'clause'forfailureor
delayinfulfillingthecontract.
4.5.Article8statesthat'failuretoreplyshallnot
constituteconsent'.Thisisvitalifabusesaretobe
avoided.However,itwouldbeevenmorewatertight
tostatethatanystatementtothecontrary(i.e.that
failuretoreplyequalsconsent)isinvalid.
4.6.Theinformationtobesuppliedbythetime
ofdelivery(Article10)shouldexplicitlymentionthe
guaranteeconditions .Theinformationshouldalsobe
suppliedinalanguagewithwhichthepurchaseris
fullyfamiliar.Theproposedarrangement—thatthe
informationshouldbeinthesamelanguageasthe
contractsolicitation—mightnotprotecttheconsumer
adequately .
4.7.Theseven-dayminimumdeadlineforrightof
withdrawal (Article11)isshorterthanthecooling-off
periodinGermanyandtheUK,thecountrieswiththe
greatestexperienceofdistanceselling.Ideally,national
legislationsshoulddrawontheirexperience .Astandard
methodshouldalsobeusedforcalculatingthenumber
ofdays(inclusionorexclusionofnon-workingdays).
4.8.TheCommitteeappreciatestherecognitionin
Article13(2),inaccordancewithnationallegislation,
oftherightoftradeandconsumerorganizationstotake
legalaction.Italsowelcomestheconsumerprotection
affordedbythebindingnatureoftherightsconferred
bythepresentDirective(Article14).4.Specificcomments
4.1.ThedefinitionssetoutinArticle2shouldspecify
thattheonlycontractsinvolvedarethosewhichorig­
inateina'solicitation',whetherornotaccompanied
byadvertising .Contractsoriginatinginarequestfrom
anindividualconsumerforthesupplyofagoodor
service(acommonpracticeintheretailtrade)should
beexcluded.
4.2.Thedefinitionofaconsumerassomeonewho
actsinapersonalcapacity,i.e.'forpurposes....outside
histradeorprofession',isuseful.
4.3.Respectforconsumerprivacy(Article4)isvery
important,especiallyinthecaseoftheelderlyand
minorsastheyaremorevulnerabletoimproperforms
ofsolicitation .Aconsumershouldnotreceivesolici­
tationsifhehasexpressedawishnotto.SomeMember
DoneatBrussels,24November1992.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN