WRITTEN QUESTION E-0808/02 by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Purchase of mobile phones in Italy.
Date: 2002-03-25
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: access to information, consumer protection, contract, mobile phone, telecommunications policy, transmission network, unfair terms of contract, universal service

C 229 E/140

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

26.9.2002

As regards young people aged between 14 and 25, the Commission subsidised several awareness-raising
campaigns in 2001, as it had done in previous years, specifically targeted at this population group. Actions
carried out successfully at national or local level will be reviewed in 2002 in order to put together and
circulate a guide on best practices.

In any case, road safety is, in all its aspects, a shared responsibility. The situation can only be substantially
improved if all actors (users, transport undertakings, manufacturers, teachers, police forces), at all levels
(Community, national, regional and local), are firmly resolved to take action.

(1) White Paper ’ European transport policy for 2010: time to decide, COM(2001) 370 final.

(2002/C 229 E/160)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0808/02

by Emilia Müller (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(25 March 2002)

Subject: Purchase of mobile phones in Italy

A German family bought a mobile phone for use with prepaid cards in Italy and registered it at their
address in Germany. The phone worked perfectly at first, but when the family went to stay in Italy again, it
was blocked by the network operator concerned. When they queried this with the network operator, they
were told that foreigners cannot buy mobile phones in Italy.

Will the Commission therefore state:

1. Whether the Italian network operator is justified in denying all foreign citizens the right to buy mobile

phones for use with prepaid cards?

2.

3.

If so, what grounds does it have for acting as it has, and how are its actions justified?

If not, what can be done to remedy this deplorable state of affairs?

4. What action it recommends the purchaser to take in this case?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(11 June 2002)

The Commission is aware of the existence of different regimes used by the operators with respect to
mobile phones which can be used with a pre-paid card:

’ Blocked phones. These phones, which have a ‘SIMlock’ can only be used with a pre-paid card of the
same telecoms operator within the same or in different Member States. For example, if somebody buys
a blocked pre-paid mobile phone from a German operator and he wants to use it in Italy he will have
to use his German pre-paid card. This means that the service will be provided by an Italian operator
with whom the German operator has previously concluded a roaming agreement, and the user will be
charged a roaming tariff which may be higher than that of an international call whether he calls
Germany, Italy or other countries. The Commission conducted a sector inquiry into roaming which
found that prices were generally high and unrelated to costs. The Commission is now engaged in a
follow up action under the competition rules.

’ Non-blocked phones. These can be used with pre-paid cards from different operators within the same
or in different Member States. For example, if somebody buys a non-blocked pre-paid mobile phone
from a German operator and he wants to use it in Italy, it is to his advantage to use a pre-paid card
from an Italian operator. This means that the service will be entirely provided by an Italian operator
and the user would be charged the price applicable to national calls if he calls another number in Italy,
or the price applicable to international calls if he is calling abroad.

26.9.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 229 E/141

The issue of blocked and non-blocked mobile phones is not regulated at Community level. On the national
level, for the moment, only Belgium has introduced legislation which prohibits operators from blocking
mobile phones. In other Member States the decision to block is either left entirely to the operators or they
are obliged to offer at least non-blocked phones. In other words, they have to offer at least mobile phones
at their real price letting the consumers have the choice of what pre-paid card regime they want to have.
In practice, most companies offer both. Consequently, the regime applicable to pre-paid mobile phones
remains a question of commercial practice of the operators and a question of consumer choice. It is not a
measure imposed by Member States’ governments. Where private economic actors apply rules or pursue
practices which might not be consistent with internal market principles, it is first and foremost for the
national courts to enforce those principles.

Furthermore, this is a question which is not particular to the provision of services between Member States.
The problems that may arise from the possibility of blocking mobile phones equally concern operators in
the same Member State.

The Commission recalls that the European Directives on consumer protection and its implementing
legislation in the Member States apply in any case, in particular, Council Directive 93/13/CEE of 5 April
1993, on unfair terms in consumer contracts (1), which sets out an obligation for Member States to ensure
that contracts concluded with consumers do not contain unfair terms and Parliament and Council
Directive 98/10/EC of 26 February 1998 on the application of open network provision to voice telephony
and on universal service for telecommunications in a competitive environment (2), which establishes that
mobile public telephone service providers are required to publish adequate and up-to-date information for
consumers on the terms and conditions applying to their services (Article 11.1). The same principles are
included in the new regulatory framework adopted on 7 March 2002 (Article 21.1 of 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 (3)).

(1) OJ L 95, 21.4.1993.
(2) OJ L 101, 1.4.1998.
(3) OJ L 108, 24.4.2002.

(2002/C 229 E/161)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0817/02

by Camilo Nogueira Román (Verts/ALE) to the Council

(27 March 2002)

Subject: The parallel economy in Spain

According to the Commission reports on the parallel economy in the Union, it accounts for 23 % of GDP
in Spain, a percentage exceeded only by Italy.

What steps is the Council considering to put an end to this serious situation and, in particular, what
measures does it consider should be applied to Spain, in view of the Commission’s analyses?

Reply

(27 June 2002)

The Council would ask the Honourable Member to contact the competent authorities for this matter
directly.