Report on the Activities of the Hungarian Financial Arbitration Board
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HUNGARIAN FINANCIAL ARBITRATION BOARD 2O17 REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HUNGARIAN FINANCIAL ARBITRATION BOARD 2O17 Published by the Magyar Nemzeti Bank Publisher in charge: Eszter Hergár H-1054 Budapest, Szabadság tér 9. www.mnb.hu Contents Chair’s foreword 5 1 Operation of the Board 7 1.1 Legal environment 7 1.2 Organisation and governance 10 1.3 Domestic and international relations 10 1.3.1 Domestic relations 10 1.3.2 International relations 12 1.4 Alternative Dispute Resolution Conference II. 15 1.5 Professional assistance to law students 22 2 Professional activity of the Board in 2017 25 2.1 Conciliation activity in figures 25 2.1.1 Received petitions 25 2.1.2 Closed cases 28 2.2 Analysis, recommendations and warnings by sectors with a view to preventing or resolving future problems 35 2.2.1 Disputes related to money market services 35 2.2.2 Disputes related to insurances 52 2.2.3 Disputes related to capital markets and investment services 63 2.2.4 Disputes related to funds 65 2.3 Cross-border financial consumer disputes 66 2.4 Activity in 2017 related to settlement cases 68 Published by the Magyar Nemzeti Bank 3 Decisions of the Board contested at the court 71 3.1 Litigious procedures 71 Publisher in charge: Eszter Hergár 3.2 Non-litigious procedures in settlement cases 74 H-1054 Budapest, Szabadság tér 9. www.mnb.hu Annex Annex 1: Operating procedures of the Financial Arbitration Board 76 Annex 2: General consumer petition 91 Annex 3: FIN-NET form for cross –border financial services complaints 98 Annex 4: Financial Service Providers concerned with procedures in 2017 100 Annex 5: Rules governing the registration of submission declarations 105 Annex 6: Rules pertaining to data collection and the management of data asset 107 Annex 7: Information on the financial advisory offices operated by the partners of the Magyar Nemzeti Bank 109 REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HUNGARIAN FINANCIAL ARBITRATION BOARD • 2017 3 Chair’s foreword The year of transformation. This is how the events of 2017 at the Financial Arbitration Board may be summed up. This year has almost fully transformed and changed the trends observed in previous years. Nine years after the financial crisis and two years after the introduction of the statutory settlement obligation, the ratio of the case types taken to the Board to the services resulting in disputes, as well as the nature of petitions and the behaviour of service providers have changed compared to the past. We opened the year with 651 ongoing cases, received 3,644 new cases, closed 3,694 cases and on the last day of the year we had 601 pending cases. The most significant change consisted in the fact that the number of credit and loan cases, representing the largest proportion in each of the previous years, substantially declined; compared to 2016 their number fell by 717. This is not surprising, as since the establishment of the Board disputes were dominated by those resulting from foreign currency-denominated loans. However, by 2017 the situation in the area of financial services related to the extension of credits and loans in the financial market has materially improved, as by then the statutory settlement process with the respective service providers has been completed, the deadlines for legal remedy have also expired and the “fair banking” rules have been in effect for more than two years already, which also had a large impact. Since the end of 2016 and mostly in 2017 major portfolio transfers took place in the market of non-performing loans; the original lenders assigned their claims against private individuals arising from credit, loan and lease contracts to debt management companies. All these collectively contributed to fewer disputes related to credit and loan products than earlier, but simultaneously the number of cases brought against debt management companies, primarily on the basis of equity, significantly rose. The case volume related to deposits and payments was also higher than in previous years. In the field of insurance a decline was registered, albeit only to a smaller degree. Just like before, the disputes referred to us mostly concerned compulsory motor third-party liability insurances, fire and other property claims. The number of disputes related to investment services and funds was negligible this year as well, and both declined compared to the previous year. 91 per cent of the received petitions were initiated against banks, insurers and financial enterprises and the majority of financial consumers who turned to us came from Budapest and Pest county in 2017 as well. We found that consumers had become slightly more conscious, they pay more attention to the attributes of the various financial products, understand the characteristics and functions of financial services better, they are able to formulate their requirements and prepare their applications more clearly. The number of petitions suitable for judgement on the merits has materially increased, accounting for 82 per cent of all cases. The attitude of financial service providers and the way they treated their customers also showed a much more positive picture than before. We perceived major improvement at their end in their readiness to reach a compromise. Several service providers reached an agreement with their customer or granted the full request included in the petition already before the date set for the hearing. This accounted for 11.4 per cent of the cases closed with a resolution to terminate. Including this, the ratio of cases with a positive outcome for petitioners was 40.7 per cent of the total number of cases, outstripping the value registered in 2016 by 8.5 percentage points. I do hope that in 2018 we shall be able to help as many private individual customers as possible whose credit, loan or lease transactions have been transferred to debt management companies and found no solution or were unable to reach a reassuring agreement. I thank all financial service providers and petitioners for their willingness to reach a compromise, that managed to settle their disputes as the result of our assistance and cooperation. I hope that with each settlement agreement we can contribute to maintaining long lasting and mutually advantageous relations between the service providers and their customers. Dr. Erika Kovács Chair of the Financial Arbitration Board REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HUNGARIAN FINANCIAL ARBITRATION BOARD • 2017 5 1 Operation of the Board The operation of the Board in 2017 was based on the rules stipulated in Articles 96-130 of Act CXXXIX of 2013 on the Magyar Nemzeti Bank and in Sections 21-22 of Act XL of 2014. 1.1 LEGAL ENVIRONMENT Last year, the provisions of the MNB Act related to the Board were amended only in respect of the binding resolutions and the remedy related to the statutory submission with effect from 1 January 2017 and 1 July 2017, respectively. The most important change lay in the new rule that introduced mandatory statutory submission, the purpose of which was to ensure that a higher proportion of financial service providers conclude a settlement agreement than before, and if this nevertheless does not happen, the Board should have the possibility to adopt a binding resolution when there is an infringement. “Article 113 (2) In the absence of a negotiated settlement the council may adopt a binding decision also if the body or person covered by the acts enumerated in Section 39 did not make a statement of submission, however, the request is found substantiated and the consumer’s claim shown in the request does not exceed one million forints at the time the binding decision is adopted.“ The amendment of the Act also provided financial service providers with a special legal remedy in relation to this rule, to ensure that they can go to court to contest such decisions: “Article 121 (1) The bodies or persons covered by the acts enumerated in Section 39 may oppose a binding decision adopted in the proceedings referred to in Subsection (2) of Section 113 by lodging a statement of opposition within fifteen days of service. (2) The Financial Arbitration Board shall refuse the statement of opposition: a) if filed in delay; b) if filed by a person other than the claimant. (3) In the event of non-compliance with the deadline prescribed for filing a statement of opposition, the consequences of such non-compliance may be remedied by way of justification. (4) Justification may be submitted within fifteen days. That deadline shall start on the last day of the time limit prescribed for lodging the statement of opposition. However, if the party gained knowledge of said non-compliance past that time or if the obstacle was eliminated afterward, the deadline for justification shall begin at the time of gaining knowledge or the time when the obstacle was eliminated. After one month following the time of non-compliance no justification may be submitted. (5) The justification shall state the reason for non-compliance and the circumstances to verify that the person in question is non-actionable. (6) The Financial Arbitration Board shall decide regarding the justification. (7) Lodging the justification shall have suspensory effect on enforcement. (8) The decision dismissing the statement of opposition - or the justification and the statement of opposition both if justification has been lodged - may be appealed by the person lodging the statement of opposition. The appeal shall be heard by the general court of jurisdiction by reference to the consumer’s domestic home address, or domestic habitual residence if no home address is available, in non-contentious proceedings according to the provisions of the CPC on REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES OF THE HUNGARIAN FINANCIAL ARBITRATION BOARD • 2017 7 MAGYAR NEMZETI BANK appeals against rulings.