WRITTEN QUESTION E-2814/03 by Elisabeth Jeggle (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Charges for bank transfers between Germany and the United Kingdom.
Date: 2003-09-19
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Germany, United Kingdom, application of EU law, bank charges, consumer protection, credit transfer, exchange transaction

13.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65 E/221

The Member States are responsible for the practical application of the Directives (and Directive 93/68/EC
in particular). They have to set up the administrative and technical procedures required to ensure that
Community legislation is correctly applied.

The Commission will take the appropriate measures bestowed upon it by the EC Treaty, should it emerge
that Community legislation has not been correctly applied.

(1) Council Directive 73/23/EEC of 19 February 1973 on the harmonization of the laws of Member States relating to

electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits, OJ L 77, 26.3.1973.

(2) Council Directive 93/68/EEC of 22 July 1993 amending Directives 87/404/EEC (simple pressure vessels), 88/378/
EEC (safety of toys), 89/106/EEC (construction products), 89/336/EEC (electromagnetic compatibility), 89/392/EEC
(machinery), 89/686/EEC (personal protective equipment), 90/384/EEC (non-automatic weighing instruments), 90/
385/EEC (active implantable medicinal devices), 90/396/EEC (appliances burning gaseous fuels), 91/263/EEC
(telecommunications terminal equipment), 92/42/EEC (new hot-water boilers fired with liquid or gaseous fuels) and
73/23/EEC (electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits), OJ L 220, 30.8.1993.

(3) Council Directive 92/59/EEC of 29 June 1992 on general product safety, OJ L 228, 11.8.1992.
(4) Council Directive 70/156/EEC of 6 February 1970 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating

to the type-approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, OJ L 42, 23.2.1970.

(2004/C 65 E/235)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2814/03

by Elisabeth Jeggle (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(19 September 2003)

Subject: Charges for bank transfers between Germany and the United Kingdom

On 1 July 2003, in Germany at least, an EU measure was introduced making the cost of bank transfers to
another EU country the same as that of domestic transfers. This is intended to save customers money.

A German citizen transferred EUR 50 to the United Kingdom and paid a EUR 3 charge to the German
bank and a further GBP 10 to Alliance and Leicester International.

Prior to 1 July 2003, the citizen paid a total of only EUR 7,50 for the transfer of EUR 50.

This raises the following questions:

1.

Is it possible that the UK has not introduced this EU regulation, or is it getting round it by using the
term ‘handling charge’ in place of ‘transfer charge’?

2.

Is a ‘handling fee’ of GBP 10 for the transfer of a small sum not a case of daylight robbery?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(30 October 2003)

As a general remark, the principle of the equality of charges for cross-border and corresponding
1.
national transfers, which is the subject of this question, is based on Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of 19 December 2001 on cross-border payments in euro (1).
Given that the provisions of the Regulation are directly applicable in the Member States, there is no need
for transposition by the Member States. The banks concerned are already bound by the provisions of the
Regulation.

C 65 E/222

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

13.3.2004

The Regulation must also be observed in the United Kingdom for cross-border payments in euro, although
pound-euro conversion costs may be charged on cross-border transfers in euro from and to the United
Kingdom. In this respect, if the currency has to be converted, then a transfer from Germany to the United
Kingdom will be more expensive than a national euro transfer. Under the Regulation, the bank is obliged
to inform its customers of these exchange charges.

In this specific case, it is not possible to establish from the information given in the Written Question
whether the provisions of the Regulation have been observed by the banks concerned. The Commission
would, however, be happy to accept and investigate any further information which Ms Jeggle or the citizen
concerned may provide (e.g. account statements, lists of charges). In addition, in disputes concerning cross-
border financial services the citizen concerned may turn to the dispute settlement bodies in the ‘FIN-NET’
network. These are out-of-court dispute settlement bodies which help citizens who have problems with
their
information on possible contacts can be found on the
Commission website at: (http://europa.eu.int/comm/internal_market/de/finances/consumer/intro.htm).

financial services providers. Further

The Commission would, finally, like to point out that it will be compiling a report next year on the effects
of Regulation (EC) No 2560/2001, in which it will also look into the trend in national price levels for
payments.

The question as to whether a handling fee of £10 for transfers can be described as ‘daylight robbery’,

2.
is a matter for the law of the country concerned and cannot be answered by the Commission.

(1) OJ L 344, 28.12.2001.

(2004/C 65 E/236)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2816/03

by Joan Vallvé (ELDR) to the Commission

(19 September 2003)

Subject: Community initiatives

The Berlin European Council of March 1999 approved the economic resources for the Structural Funds
and the Community Initiatives for 2000-2006.

The Community Initiatives support European-scale policies on completing the Union. They are activities
which the Commission proposes to the Member States, with a view to resolving specific existing
programmes throughout Union territory. They supplement
the Community Support
Frameworks and the Single Programming Documents, which the Commission and the Member States
negotiated on the basis of regional or national development plans.

the work of

For 2000-2006, over which period the Commission wished to step up the European dimension of the
Community Initiatives, and likewise the way in which it complements priority objectives.

Four Community Initiatives are to be carried out, each one funded by one of the Structural Funds:

(cid:1) Interreg III: Cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation (ERDF);

(cid:1) Urban II: Regenerating urban areas in crisis (ERDF);

(cid:1) Leader+: Rural development (EAGGF Guidance);

(cid:1) Equal: Fighting discrimination and inequality relating to the labour market (ESF).

There is a danger that some of these Community Initiatives will be claimed by the Member States, on the
understanding that they are domestic policies.

What does the Commission think of the renationalisation of the Community Initiatives, and specifically,
Interreg III (cid:1) Chapter A, on cross-border cooperation?