COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE Alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes in the Single Market
Date: 2011-11-29
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Internet site, arbitration, consumer protection, electronic commerce, information system, regulation of transactions, single market

EUROPEAN COMMISSION 

Brussels, 29.11.2011 
COM(2011) 791 final 

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN 
PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL 
COMMITTEE 

Alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes in the Single Market 

{SEC(2011) 1408} 
{SEC(2011) 1409} 

 
 
  
 
1. 

NEED FOR ACCESS TO EFFECTIVE REDRESS SYSTEMS 

The "Europe 2020 strategy" states that a stronger, deeper and extended single market is vital 
for growth and job creation. In order to live up to this challenge, the Single Market must adapt 
to a new reality characterised, in particular, by the increasing recourse to internet as a retail 
channel  and  the  emergence  of  new  types  of  services.  The  consumers'  trust  in  the  Single 
Market is affected by the lack of confidence that their problems related to purchases of goods 
and  services  can  be  addressed  efficiently.  This  Communication  explains  how  the 
Commission's  proposals  on  alternative  dispute  resolution  ('ADR')  and  Online  Dispute 
Resolution  ('ODR')  contribute  to  promoting  access  to  swift,  cheap  and  effective  dispute 
resolution through alternative dispute resolution procedures as means to empower consumers 
and  put  them  at  the  heart  of  the  single  market.  The  proposals  form  part  of  the  twelve  key 
actions of the Single Market Act1.  

As  indicated  in  the  Monti  Report  on  a  "New  Strategy  for  the  Single  Market"2  and  as  also 
reflected  in  the  Single  Market  Act,  the  Single  Market  embodies  an  ideal;  a  space  across 
national boundaries where citizens and businesses can move and exercise their rights freely. 
This  naturally  includes  being  able  to  enter  into  cross-border  transactions.  However,  for 
consumers and businesses, the Single Market still presents many challenges.  

In the EU, we have achieved a high level of consumer protection, but it is still difficult for the 
consumers to enforce their rights. Recent studies show that the number of disputes submitted 
to ADR, including ODR, has increased in the EU from 410.000 in 2006 to 530.000 in 2008 3. 
However, only 5% of European consumers took their case to an ADR entity in 20104 and only 
9%  of  businesses  report  ever  having  used  ADR5.  The  number  of  disputes  relating  to  cross-
border transactions is increasing.6 Yet the majority of consumer complaints currently remain 
unresolved.  Recourse  to  simple,  efficient  and  low-cost  means  of  resolving  disputes  through 
ADR procedures is not yet fully explored. .  

Evidence  shows  that  consumers  fail  to  fully  exploit  the  opportunities  that  the  single  market 
offers  in  terms  of  a  wider  choice  of  products  or  more  effective  competition  on  price  and 
quality. When buying cross-border, consumers are worried that finding a solution if they have 

1  

2 

3 
4 
5 
6  

Communication  from  the  Commission  to  the  European  Parliament,  the  Council,  the  economic  and 
social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the  Regions:  Single  Market  Act  –  Twelve  levers  to  boost 
growth and strengthen confidence, "Working together to create new growth", COM (2011) 206 final, p. 
9. 
Report by Mario Monti to the President of the European Commission: "A New Strategy for the Single 
Market" of 9 June 2010. 
ADR study, p. 8; http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/redress_cons/adr_study.pdf 
Eurobarometer (EB) 342, p. 184. 
EB 300, p. 76. 
The  number  of  cross-border  complaints  received  by  European  Consumer  Centres  (ECCs)  totalled 
35.000  in  2009,  an  increase  of  55%  compared  with  2005.  The  share  of  complaints  relating  to  e-
commerce transactions amounted to more than 55% in 2009 and 2010 and this share has doubled since 
20066.  In  2009,  38  FIN-NET  members  reported  having  handled  1542  disputes  while,  in  2010,  32 
members reported 1800 disputes. 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
a  problem  will  be  difficult7  and  as  a  result,  consumers  are  currently  reluctant  to  buy  cross-
border.  

Empirical  data  shows  that  before  bringing  a  case  to  court,  a  consumer  estimates  how  much 
time, money and effort will be required to obtain redress and then weighs these considerations 
against  the  value  of  the  claim8.  Faced  with  the  complexity  of  the  laws  governing  their 
disputes, in particular disputes relating to cross-border transactions, consumers are frequently 
not convinced that going to court would offer them a viable solution, and hence in most cases, 
they will discard this option if an initial contact with the trader has proved to be unsuccessful. 

Similarly, businesses, in particular small businesses, are concerned by the risk that they may 
have  to  deal  with  legal  and  judicial  systems  with  which  they  are  unfamiliar9.  Therefore, 
traders often abstain from venturing into new markets which would give them access to new 
customers  and  the  chance  to  expand.  This  lack  of  confidence  has  an  impact  on  the 
competitiveness of businesses. 

The growth in e-commerce has increased the scale of missed opportunities: the internet offers 
any  business  a  shopping  window  open  to  the  world,  and  consumers  can  just  as  easily  shop 
from their laptops as they can on their local high streets. However, e-commerce, and cross-
border e-commerce in particular, has been persistently slow to take off in Europe.  

Among other initiatives to be taken by the Commission to remedy this situation, one way to 
improve redress in the internal market is to improve the availability and make further use of 
out-of-court dispute resolution entities. ADR is a low-cost and fast alternative for consumers 
and businesses seeking to resolve disputes. The vast majority of ADR procedures are free of 
charge  for  consumers  or  of  moderate  costs  (below  €50).  Most  disputes  submitted  to  ADR 
entities are decided within 90 days.10  

Most  consumers  who  have  used  ADR  recall  it  as  a  straightforward  and  transparent  process 
where  support  and  advice  was  provided11.  Hence,  consumers  are  more  willing  to  resolve 
disputes  through  ADR  than  through  court  proceedings.  Businesses  also  prefer  resolving 
disputes through ADR, and those businesses which have already used ADR would use it again 
in the future12.  

However,  the  diversity  and  uneven  geographical  and  sectoral  availability  of  ADR  entities 
prevent  consumers  and  businesses  from  fully  exploiting  their  potential.  In  some  Member 

7 

8 

9 

10 
11 

12 

EB  252,  p.  55:  71%  of  consumers  considers  the  resolution  of  problems  as  being  more  difficult  when 
shopping abroad. 
EB 342: 39% of European consumers did not go to court after a problem they encountered because the 
sums  involved  were  too  small  or  the  procedure  would  be  too  expensive  with  respect  to  the  sum 
involved.  
Flash  EB  224  "Business  attitudes  towards  cross-border  sales  and  consumer  protection",  The  Gallup 
Organisation,  2008  http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_224_en.pdf:  59%  of  businesses  stated 
that  an  important/very  important  obstacle  to  them  selling  cross-border  is  the  potentially  higher  costs 
involved in resolving complaints and conflicts cross-border compared to domestic disputes. 
See: ADR study, p. 8. 
See: Study on "consumer redress in the EU: consumer experiences, perceptions and choices", TNS qual, 
2009, p. 48. 
EB 300, p.79: 54% preferred ADR and 82% of the businesses which have already used ADR would use 
it again in the future. This evidence is further reinforced when looking at the satisfaction of businesses; 
of those who used ADR, 76% found it a satisfactory way to settle the dispute European Business Test 
Panel, http://ec.europa.eu/yourvoice/ebtp/consultations/2010/adr/index_en.htm). 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
                                                 
States  ADR  entities  are  not  yet  developed.  In  other  Member  States  existing  ADR  entities 
cover only part of the territory or are only competent in specific sectors in the retail market. 
This has generated complexity, which has an adverse impact on their efficiency and dissuades 
consumers and businesses from using them. Furthermore, consumers and businesses are often 
not aware of the possibility of referring their disputes to an existing ADR entity, or they do 
not  know  whether  their  dispute  would  fall  within  the  scope  of  application  of  a  given  ADR 
entity. 

The  Commission  has  been  active  in  promoting  ADR  for  more  that  10  years.  The  two 
Recommendations  adopted  by  the  Commission  in  199813  and  200114  have  had  a  positive 
effect, in particular by setting out a number of core quality criteria that ADR entities should 
respect.  However,  as  illustrated  above,  they  are  not  sufficient  for  granting  consumers 
confidence in the Single Market. 

In  order  to  develop  the  full  potential  of  the  Single  Market  as  the  growth  engine  for  the 
European economy we need legislative action that ensures that every consumer in the EU can 
bring  a  dispute,  regardless  of  the  sector  in  which  it  has  arisen,  and  regardless  of  whether  it 
relates to a domestic or a cross-border transaction, to an appropriate ADR entity.  

As part of the strategy for addressing the problem related to the slow take off of e-commerce 
in  Europe,  the  'Digital  Agenda  for  Europe'  called  for  EU-wide  measures  to  improve  ADR 
systems and announced that the Commission intended to "propose a EU-wide online redress 
tool for e-commerce" in order to build the much-needed confidence in online shopping.  

To  reach  these  objectives  without  imposing  excessive  and  unnecessary  burdens  on  the 
Member  States,  the  Commission  proposes  legislation  measures  which  build  on  the  entities 
that already exist in Member States.  

This approach is needed not only because dispute resolution entities are more effective when 
based on local realities, but also with a view to leaving Member States the necessary margin 
for deciding how best to fulfil their obligation. In particular, where ADR entities do not exist, 
Member States are not obliged to ensure that a specific ADR entity is created in each retail 
sector. They may instead decide to create a single or residual cross-sectoral entity to 'fill the 
gaps' in ADR coverage on their territory. 

This  communication  on  "Alternative  dispute  resolution  for  consumer  disputes  in  the  Single 
Market"  is  therefore  accompanied  by  two  legislative  proposals  on  ADR  and  ODR.  These 
proposals  aim  at  making  it  easier  for  consumers  to  secure  redress  in  the  Single  Market 
whether they are buying online or offline and, therefore, they effectively contribute to growth 
and economic stability through enhanced consumer demand.  

The  2011  Commission  Work  Programme  identified  consumer  ADR  as  one  of  the  strategic 
Commission  proposals  for  201115.  The  Single  Market  Act16,  identified  legislation  on 

13 

14 

15 
16 

Commission Recommendation 98/257/EC on the principles applicable to the bodies responsible for the 
out-of-court settlement of consumer disputes, OJ 115, 17.4.1998, p. 31. 
Commission  Recommendation  2001/310/EC  on  the  principles  for  out-of-court  bodies  involved  in  the 
consensual resolution of consumer disputes, OJ 109, 19.4.2001, p.56. 
Commission Legislative Work Programme for 2011, COM(2010) 623. 
"Single Market Act" COM (2011) 206, p. 9. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
Alternative Dispute Resolution and Online Dispute Resolution as one of the key actions for 
re-launching growth and strengthening consumer confidence in the Single Market.  

Political  support  for  this  approach  has  been  expressed  at  the  highest  level.  The  European 
Parliament17 and the Council18 have both endorsed the forthcoming EU legislative action in 
the  area  of  ADR  and  ODR.  Furthermore,  the  2011  Spring  and  October  European  Council 
called for adoption of the proposals by the end of 2012 as part of the coordinated efforts to 
provide a new impetus to the Single Market19.  

The  proposed  legislation  covers  contractual  disputes  between  consumers  and  traders  arising 
from  the  sale  of  goods  or  the  provision  of  services.  This  includes  complaints  filed  by 
consumers against traders but also  complaints filed  by  traders  against  consumers.  However, 
the proposals do not cover disputes between businesses (business-to-business disputes). The 
relationship between consumers and businesses is different from the one between businesses: 
the asymmetries in the relationship between traders and consumers have given rise to specific 
rules on consumer protection, including rules on consumer information, which govern those 
transactions.  During  the  public  consultations  conducted  by  the  Commission  all  stakeholders 
(businesses, consumers, national authorities) expressed the view that these specificities should 
also  be  reflected  in  EU  legislation  on  ADR  which  should  provide  for  specific  measures  on 
ADR for consumer disputes.  

It is also important to encourage the development of European networks of ADR entities in 
order  to  facilitate  the  resolution  of  cross-border  disputes.  National  ADR  entities  should 
become  part  of  existing  sector-specific  European  networks  so  as  to  allow  them  to  function 
efficiently and  provide appropriate ADR coverage for cross-border disputes arising in those 
sectors  (e.g.  'FIN-NET  -  Network  for  settling  cross-border  financial  disputes  out-of-court'20 
consists  of  ADR  entities  handling  cross-border  disputes  between  consumers  and  financial 
services providers). 

In  addition,  in  recent  years,  a  number  of  initiatives  have  emerged  which  aim  at  developing 
transnational ADR entities within the EU where traders from different Member States adhere 
to  the  same  ADR  entity  located  in  a  single  Member  State21.  The  development  of  those 
initiatives should be further encouraged. 

The  proposed  legislation  is  a  key  step  in  the  construction  of  effective  and  efficient  out-of-
court redress systems. As such, it should be seen as paving the way for further measures that 
will complement this framework, namely the development of collective ADR and a European 
approach to collective redress.  

The  Commission  is  proposing  two  interlinked  initiatives,  a  Directive  on  ADR  and  a 
Regulation on ODR. The two proposals complement each other. The implementation of the 
Directive will make quality ADR entities available across the EU for all consumer complaints 

17 
18 

19 

20 
21 

EP resolution of 6 April 2011 on Governance and Partnership in the Single Market [2010/2289(INI)]. 
Conclusions  of  the  Competitiveness  Council  of  30  May  2011  on  the  priorities  for  re-launching  the 
Single Market (Doc.10993/11). 
Conclusions  of  the  European  Council  of  24-25  March  2011  (Doc.  EUCO  10/11)  and  of  23  October 
2011 (Doc. EUCO 52/11) . 
http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/finservices-retail/finnet/index_en.htm  
See for instance "European Car Rental Conciliation Service (ECRCS)", a pilot project launched in July 
2010  dealing  with  disputes 
rentals  within  Europe 
(http://www.leaseurope.org/index.php?page=consumer-redress-service). 

cross-border  vehicle 

linked 

to 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
related to contractual disputes arising from the sale of goods or the provision of services. This 
is  a  key  requirement  for  the  functioning  of  the  ODR  platform  which  will  be  set  up  by  the 
regulation. 

1.1. 

DIRECTIVE ON ADR  

A  Directive  on  consumer  ADR  to  ensure  that  quality  ADR  entities  exist  to  deal  with 
contractual disputes arising from the sale of goods and the provision of services by traders.  

The Directive tackles the three main problem areas that have been identified after consultation 
with  interested  parties  and  using  studies  that  have  been  carried  out  on  behalf  of  the 
Commission. The problem areas are:  

(a) 

(b) 

(c) 

Gaps in the coverage of ADR entities at both sector-specific and geographical level;  

Lack of awareness and insufficient information preventing consumers and businesses 
from using ADR entities; and  

Variable quality of ADR: a significant number of ADR entities are not in line with 
the core principles laid down by the two Commission Recommendations. 

Firstly, it will be important to ensure that ADR entities are available for all consumer disputes 
that  arise  from  transactions  in  the  Single  Market.  The  Directive  aims  at  ensuring  that  ADR 
entities are in place across the EU covering any contractual consumer dispute arising from the 
sale of goods or the provision of services.  

In addition, the lack of detailed information constitutes for consumers, but also for traders, a 
significant  barrier  to  the  use  of  ADR.  Traders  will  be  required  to  provide  consumers  with 
information  on  which  ADR  entity  is  competent  to  deal  with  potential  contractual  consumer 
disputes involving them. Traders will also be obliged to inform consumers on whether or not 
they commit to use ADR in relation to complaints lodged against them by consumers.  

The Directive also aims at ensuring that ADR entities respect a number of quality principles, 
such  as  impartiality,  transparency,  effectiveness  and  fairness.  Competent  authorities  in  the 
Member States will monitor the ADR entities and ensure that they function properly.  

Following the proper implementation of the Directive, any consumer, wherever he is resident 
in the EU, will have access to quality ADR entities when problems arise from any purchase of 
goods or services from a trader established in the EU. 

1.2. 

REGULATION ON ODR 

A Regulation on consumer ODR to enable consumers and traders to access directly an online 
platform  which  will  help  to  resolve  contractual  disputes  arising  from  cross-border  online 
transactions through the intervention of an ADR entity complying with the Directive.  

The Regulation establishes a European online dispute resolution platform' ('ODR platform'). 
This platform, established by the Commission, will be directly accessible by consumers and 
traders and will transmit their complaints to an ADR entity which is competent to deal with 
their dispute. The platform will thus build on the availability of ADR for consumer disputes   
in all Member States.  

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
The ODR platform will be an interactive website offering to consumers and traders a single 
point of entry for the resolution of contractual disputes arising from cross-border e-commerce 
transactions.  The  platform  will  be  accessible  in  all  official  languages  of  the  EU  and  its  use 
will be free of charge. Its operation will be eased by a network of ODR facilitators.  

Consumers  and  traders  will  be  able  to  submit  complaints  through  an  electronic  complaint 
form  which  will  be  available  on  the  platform's  website  in  all  official  languages  of  the  EU. 
Through  the  data  submitted  in  the  electronic  complaint  form,  the  platform  will  be  able  to 
identify  the  ADR  entities  which  are  potentially  competent  to  deal  with  the  dispute  and 
automatically  transmit  the  complaint  to  the  ADR  entity  on  the  competence  of  which  the 
parties have agreed., That ADR entity will seek to resolve the dispute in accordance with its 
own rules of procedure. However, all complaints handled via the ODR platform, being related 
to e-commerce, will need to be dealt with quickly. Therefore, the Regulation sets a time limit 
which is shorter than what it normally takes to resolve an offline dispute. 

The platform will also provide information on ADR entities and general information on ADR 
as  a  means  of  out-of-court  dispute  resolution.  Consumers  will  be  able  to  find  information 
about  the  ODR  platform,  including  an  electronic  link  to  the  platform,  on  traders'  websites. 
When consumers search for goods or services on relevant websites they will thus be able to 
find  out,  before  entering  into  a  transaction,  about  possible  means  of  redress  for  problems 
potentially arising from the transaction envisaged. This will give confidence to consumers in 
their decision to buy online and across borders. 

The  Regulation  will  thus  tackle  a  primary  concern  about  buying  and  selling  online  cross-
border, unlocking the full potential of e-commerce. In a digital world, it will be important to 
enable  consumers  and  traders  to  file  their  complaints  online  and  to  deal  with  disputes  by 
electronic  means.  This  will  create  economies  of  scale,  make  life  easier  and  speed  up  the 
resolution of cross-border cases. 

2. 

RESULTS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE PACKAGE 

These examples are based on real disputes between businesses and consumers: 

Anna, a European citizen, ordered furniture for her new apartment from a seller established 
in her Member State. She agreed with the seller to have the furniture delivered to her home 
and  to  pay  half  the  price  upfront  and  the  remainder  on  delivery.  When  the  furniture  was 
delivered,  Anna  noticed  that  the  surface  of  the  table  was  badly  scratched  and  the  sofa 
stained. She now refuses to pay the outstanding amount and demands that the seller replaces 
the table and the sofa. The seller believes that the furniture was delivered in perfect condition 
and  insists  that  Anna  must  fulfil  her  obligations.  Taking  their  dispute  to  a  court  will  be 
expensive and time-consuming for Anna and the seller. Both parties are looking for a cheap 
and quick way to resolve their dispute22. 

22 

Fictitious story based on real problems. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
 
                                                 
Oliver and Eloise, two European citizens, booked a one-week holiday package for a trip for 
two to another Member State online. The package which was offered by a service provider in 
that  Member  State  included  the  plane  fare,  hotel  accommodation  with  a  double  room,  and 
breakfast. A 20% deposit for the hotel reservation was charged. 

Upon  arrival  at  the  hotel,  Oliver  and  Eloise  were  told  that  there  were  no  double  rooms 
available.  They  were  also  informed  that  they  had  to  pay  an  extra  10  euros  each  for  the 
breakfast.  They  expressed  their  disappointment  and  asked  for  the  hotel  management  to 
provide them with the services as described on the website. The management of the hotel was 
unable  to  do  that  or  to  offer  them  an  alternative  solution.  Oliver  and  Eloise  requested  the 
return of their deposit but the hotel management refused to make a refund. They had to find 
alternative accommodation thus incurring extra expenses. 

On  their  return,  Oliver  and  Eloise  made  several  attempts  to  contact  both  the  hotel  and  the 
provider of the holiday package to reclaim their deposit. However, they were unsuccessful in 
getting their money back. As Oliver and Eloise did not know where to turn to for finding an 
easy  way to  resolve their dispute, they contacted the European Consumer Centre  (ECC) in 
their Member State and filed a complaint explaining the situation. The ECC then contacted 
the ECC in the service provider's Member State in an attempt to find a way of resolving the 
dispute  with  the  hotel.  The  ADR  entity  in  the  service  provider's  Member  State  which  deals 
with these kinds of disputes worked on the case once the service provider agreed to use this 
procedure. After 6 months and a number of letters and phone calls, the trader agreed to pay 
back the deposit. 

Although Oliver and Eloise finally got the money back, the procedure took them very long. 
They are therefore very keen on finding a faster and more effective solution to their dispute23. 

Going  back  to  the  consumers  whose  stories  are  reported  above,  let  us  now  see  how  their 
stories would unfold after the implementation of the Commission's proposals. 

Anna and the furniture company were able to identify the competent ADR entity to deal with 
their  dispute  through  the  receipt  that  she  was  given  upon  payment  of  the  first  instalment. 
Thanks to the intervention of the ADR entity, the facts were clarified and an amicable solution 
was found for the parties. The seller agreed to replace the damaged goods and Anna, in her 
turn, agreed to pay the outstanding amount. 

23 

Fictitious story based on real problems. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
 
 
                                                 
Once  the  holiday  was  finished  and  upon  their  return  home  Oliver  and  Eloise  accessed  the 
website  they  had  used  to  book  the  holiday  package.  In  the  section  of  the  website  titled 
"consumer complaints" they found a statement by the trader about the ADR entity by which he 
is covered and that he committed to use ADR for resolving consumer disputes. The statement 
also included a link to the EU-wide ODR platform. Oliver and Eloise clicked on that link and 
were  automatically  directed  to  the  EU-wide  ODR  platform.  There,  they  found  an  electronic 
complaint  form  which  they  filled  in  in  their  mother  tongue.  The  platform  identified  a 
competent ADR entity and provided detailed information about it, including information on its 
rules of procedure and on the fees to be paid. As all this information was provided in their 
mother tongue, Oliver and Eloise easily found out all they needed to know to decide whether 
they should start an ADR procedure. Given the procedure before the ADR entity was free of 
charge for consumers, they decided to give it a go.   

The whole process was conducted online via the ODR platform and Oliver and Eloise were 
kept informed throughout the process. 

30  days  later,  Oliver  and  Eloise  received  a  message  via  the  EU-wide  ODR  platform  that  a 
decision  had  been  taken  and  that  the  service  provider  agreed  to  return  the  deposit.  Their 
dispute  was  resolved  in  a  speedy  manner  without  any  further  expenses  on  their  part.  A  few 
weeks later the whole amount of the deposit was transferred to their bank account. 

3. 

GOVERNANCE OF THE PACKAGE  

In order to ensure a smooth implementation of the Directive, the proper functioning of ADR 
entities providing quality services for consumers and traders will be closely monitored in each 
Member  State.  National  competent  authorities  will,  inter  alia,  assess  whether  a  given  ADR 
entity  respects  the  quality  requirements  laid  down  by  the  Directive.  In  addition,  they  will 
publish  regular  reports  on  the  development  and  functioning  of  ADR  entities.  Finally,  the 
Commission will draw up every three years a report on the application of the Directive and 
communicate it to the European Parliament and the Council. 

As  already  mentioned,  the  functioning  of  the  ODR  platform  is  linked  to  the  proper 
implementation of the Directive. Once full coverage of ADR entities dealing with contractual 
consumer disputes linked to the sale of goods or provision of services has been accomplished 
in all Member States, the ODR platform will be able to function fully and serve its purpose.  

The ODR platform will therefore become operational after the deadline for Member States to 
implement the directive on ADR. 

The operation of the platform requires the elaboration of IT applications that will, inter alia, 
allow  for  the  electronic  submission  of  complaints  and  the  management  of  cases  on  the 
platform.  Relevant  IT  applications  will  be  developed  and  ready  for  use  when  the  ODR 
platform becomes operational. 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
 
4. 

FLANKING MEASURES 

In addition to and in parallel with these actions, the Commission will implement a number of 
flanking  measures  which  will  enhance  the  access  to  and  the  use  of  quality  ADR  entities  by 
consumers and traders. 

4.1. 

INFORMATION 

The provision of precise and targeted information on the new measures to consumers, traders, 
national  ADR  entities  and  Member  States'  authorities  is  crucial  for  raising  awareness  levels 
and ensuring that consumers and traders make full use of quality ADR entities. 

Consumers 

As far as consumers are concerned, the Commission will organise information campaigns in 
coordination  with  national  consumer  organisations.  Information  will  also  be  transmitted 
through  websites  and  brochures.  Moreover,  audiovisual  means  will  be  used  to  attract  the 
attention  of  interested  parties  and  to  stimulate  consumers'  interest  to  search  for  more 
information  on  ADR.  The  Commission  will  display  those  audiovisual  means  on  its  website 
which will be equipped with all relevant information. 

Traders 

National and EU business organisations will be invited to coordinate and organise workshops 
and  conferences  providing  information  to  traders,  particularly  SMEs,  on  their  obligations 
under  the  new  legislation.  Moreover,  bringing  together  traders,  particularly  SMEs,  from 
across the EU will result in an exchange of best practices, promote competition and improve 
corporate complaint handling. 

For  SMEs,  additional  focus  will  be  put  on  disseminating  information  and  on  training 
measures  regarding  ADR  and  ODR  procedures,  as  well  as  consumers'  rights  and  the 
obligations  of  economic  operators.  Networks,  such  as  the  EEN  (European  Enterprise 
Network) will provide specific support on training and information on cross-border issues in 
this context.  Better informed traders, and in particular SMEs, will not only contribute to the 
success of ADR schemes and of the ODR platform but also prevent or minimise the arising of  
disputes. 

National ADR entities 

ADR entities will be informed about the changes introduced with the implementation of the 
legislative package through direct contact with other ADR entities or the ministry departments 
responsible for EU consumer affairs in the Member States. 

Member States 

Under the proposed Directive, Member States will have to ensure that the provisions on the 
coverage and quality of ADR entities established on their territories as well as the information 
requirements  are  properly  and  promptly  implemented  within  the  prescribed  deadline.  The 
Commission  is  aware  that,  in  order  to  reach  this  goal,  cooperation  with  national  authorities 
must be developed at a very early stage.  

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
4.2. 

TRAINING 

A key measure ensuring that the Directive will be fully implemented and the ODR platform 
immediately  operational  is  the  training  of  national  ADR  entities:  ADR  entities  will  be 
provided information about the quality criteria that they have to respect and the obligation to 
register  with  the  ODR  platform.  Furthermore,  the  European  Consumer  Centres  Network 
(ECC-Net)24 will also be used as a channel of communication for consumers which will assist 
them to obtain information about the functioning of the ODR platform. 

5. 

TIME FOR ACTION 

The two proposed legal instruments are designed to build confidence in the Single Market and 
simplify the lives of consumers.  

Once these proposals are adopted and implemented, consumers are expected to have access to 
quality  ADR  entities  for  contractual  disputes  resulting  from  transactions,  whether  online  or 
offline, cross-border or domestic. They will be able to easily identify the ADR entity which is 
competent to deal with their dispute. The confidence of consumers to engage in cross-border 
transactions and to extend their sphere of interest beyond the borders of their Member States 
will be strengthened. 

The  implementation  of  the  legislative  package  will  have  significant  advantages  also  for 
traders.  They  will  be  able  to  avoid  time-consuming  and  expensive  court  procedures  while 
maintaining and enhancing their business reputation. Traders can be expected to have better 
opportunities to offer a greater variety of products and services via the internet when knowing 
that  an  effective  online  system  for  redress  is  in  place.  Consequently,  businesses,  and  in 
particular SMEs, will have more incentives to also improve their internal complaint handling 
systems. This will also secure better competition in the Single Market. 

The  co-legislators  are  invited  to  adopt  the  two  legislative  proposals  by  the  end  of  2012  in 
order to ensure that this key action of the Single Market Act, alongside with its other eleven 
key actions, will be agreed at EU level to mark the 30th anniversary of the Single Market. By 
offering consumers and traders the possibility of using, if they so choose, out-of-court means 
to resolve their disputes, the EU is taking an additional step towards strengthening the Single 
Market that puts consumers at its heart. 

24 

http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/ecc/index_en.htm 

EN 

11 

   EN