EN Official Journal of the European Union CE 65/103

(2004/C 65 E/116)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1926/03

by Roberto Bigliardo (UEN) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject: Prefix 709

In Italy telephone bills for Internet connections with the prefix 709 (connections at an extra charge not covered by service contracts) are ruining many families.

Many users claim that they have never knowingly made Internet connections using this prefix. The connections go through an automatic dialer which can disconnect the user's normal connection and automatically link the user's modem to the computer or server of an Internet service provider which charges for access. The providers concerned have their administrative, fiscal and logistical headquarters outside Italy.

Users only become aware of this connection when they receive the bill.

In view of the above, can the Commission say:

1. whether it is aware of this situation;

2. whether it is able to take action to ensure that Telecom Italia subscribers who have not been informed of these measures do not have to pay the relevant charges;

3. whether it can take action to ensure that telephone providers insert in their contracts a clause requiring the user's written consent to the provision of any service for which there is an extra charge in addition to the Internet contract, particularly in order to protect financially vulnerable sections of the population?

Answer given by Mr Liikanen on behalf of the Commission

(23 July 2003)

The matters raised by the Honourable Member concern the cost of access to Internet using the prefix 709, which is charged without the consent of the subscriber; it seems that the service is provided outside the standard contract conditions agreed by the subscriber and the service provider.

1. The Italian press reported on this matter (source: Il Sole 24 Ore, 14 June 2003). In mid-June 2003 the Italian Postal and Communications Police sanctioned four telecoms operators following receipt of high number of complaints from subscribers (about 25 000). The amount of fines imposed on the four operators is about EUR 860 000 in total (source: press release of Postal Police).

2. As reported above, the matter has already been dealt with at national level. Furthermore, in response to a request from a consumer association, Telecom Italia (TI) is blocking the payment of services related to access to Internet using the prefix 709 in the event the subscriber denounces charges related to access to Internet which are not foreseen in the standard contract signed with the operator. TI has agreed to refund customers who have already paid the charges in question, which were included in their telephone bills. In the revision of the numbering plan, which is being finalised, the national regulator AGCOM is envisaging taking appropriate measures. This might include setting out an upper threshold for total charges to be paid for these kind of services. It would appear in the light of the above that appropriate action has been taken at national level.

3. Finally, it should be noted that, in general terms, the requirements of Council Directive 93/13/EEC of 5 April 1993 on unfair terms in consumer contracts (1) would apply, notably as regard transparency of prices, tariffs and conditions. From the point of view of sectoral legislation, the ‘Universal Service Directive’ (2) will be applied with effect from 25 July 2003. However, this Directive does not provide for an obligation to conclude a contract for the provision of access to Internet, but does prescribe, if contracts are concluded, that the services provided and particulars of prices and tariffs must be included. Therefore, telecoms law does not appear to provide the possibility for the Commission to request the insertion in contracts of the terms referred to in the Honourable Member's question. However, the Commission would like to draw the attention of the Honourable Member to the fact that it adopted on 18 June 2003 a proposal for a Directive on unfair Commercial Practices (3). This Directive would in particular tackle the issue of ‘misleading’ and ‘aggressive’ practices. Concerning ‘misleading’ practices, the duty imposed on businesses is not to omit ‘material’ information which the average consumer needs to make an informed transactional decision where this information would not be apparent from the context.

(1) OJ L 95, 21.4.1993.

(2) Directive 2002/22/EC of the Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on universal service and users' rights relating to electronic communications networks and services, OJ L 108, 24.4.2002.

(3) COM(2003) 356 final.