Update on Consumer Protection Landscape Reforms

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Update on Consumer Protection Landscape Reforms Update on consumer protection landscape reforms APRIL 2014 Our vision is to help the nation spend wisely. Our public audit perspective helps Parliament hold government to account and improve public services. The National Audit Office scrutinises public spending for Parliament and is independent of government. The Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG), Amyas Morse, is an Officer of the House of Commons and leads the NAO, which employs some 860 staff. The C&AG certifies the accounts of all government departments and many other public sector bodies. He has statutory authority to examine and report to Parliament on whether departments and the bodies they fund have used their resources efficiently, effectively, and with economy. Our studies evaluate the value for money of public spending, nationally and locally. Our recommendations and reports on good practice help government improve public services, and our work led to audited savings of almost £1.2 billion in 2012. Contents Summary 4 Part One Background and objectives of the reforms 5 Part Two The new consumer protection landscape 8 Part Three Issues to consider in future work 16 The National Audit Office study team consisted of: Stephanie Bryant, Charlie Gluckman and Anna Sydorak-Tomczyk, under the direction of Alex Scharaschkin. This report can be found on the National Audit Office website at www.nao.org.uk For further information about the National Audit Office please contact: National Audit Office Press Office 157–197 Buckingham Palace Road Victoria London SW1W 9SP Tel: 020 7798 7400 Enquiries: www.nao.org.uk/contact-us Links to external websites were valid at the time of Website: www.nao.org.uk publication of this report. The National Audit Office is not responsible for the future validity of the links. Twitter: @NAOorguk 4 Summary Update on consumer protection landscape reforms Summary 1 Consumer law aims to protect consumers from harm that may result from various activities, such as unfair commercial practices or scams. The responsibility for protecting consumers spans several organisations, which make up the UK’s consumer protection landscape. These organisations share responsibilities for consumer protection in several areas, including: • enforcing consumer protection; • consumer information, advice and education; and • consumer advocacy. We scrutinised the consumer protection landscape in our 2011 report Protecting consumers – the system for enforcing consumer law. The report’s findings prompted the government to introduce changes to the consumer protection landscape. 2 This paper summarises recent changes to the consumer protection landscape arrangements that were completed in April 2014. It also sets out the proposed benefits of these new arrangements to consumers, businesses and taxpayers as well as the possible risks to be managed. The paper includes: • a brief description of the previous arrangements for the consumer protection landscape, including the organisations involved and their main responsibilities; • an outline of the new consumer protection landscape arrangements and the responsibilities of the organisations involved; • a timeline of the changes; and • issues that we could consider in future value-for-money work. 3 We spoke to several organisations directly involved in the consumer protection reforms, to build up our knowledge and understanding of the issues involved. They were: • the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills; • the Office of Fair Trading; • Consumer Futures; • the National Trading Standards Board; • the Trading Standards Institute; and • Citizens Advice. These interviews allowed us to better understand existing concerns about the changes and some of their potential effects on consumers. Update on consumer protection landscape reforms Part One 5 Part One Background and objectives of the reforms 1.1 We examined the consumer protection landscape in 2011, and our report Protecting consumers – the system for enforcing consumer law 1 described the interactions among the organisations involved. Figure 1 on page 7 is adapted from that report and outlines the consumer protection landscape in 2011. 1.2 In 2011, the Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) had overall responsibility for the consumer protection landscape. Several other bodies also had relevant powers: • The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) was responsible for enforcing national priorities for consumers.2 The OFT was funded by, and accountable to, HM Treasury for these activities. The OFT was also responsible for providing consumer advice and information and for operating Consumer Direct, a telephone service for consumer complaints and advice. • The Trading Standards Services (TSS) were responsible for all local consumer law enforcement and were funded by local authorities. TSS could also tackle regional or national enforcement cases; however, the responsibility and funding for these cases was unclear and was split between TSS, the OFT and BIS. • BIS set up and funded regional teams, such as Scambusters and Illegal Money Lending, to tackle regional enforcement gaps and to target specific illegal practices. These teams required authorisation from local TSS to operate within a local authority. • BIS also funded Consumer Focus, a consumer body operating across the whole of the economy in Great Britain and covering postal services in Northern Ireland, with specific responsibilities to act as consumer advocate in the regulated gas, electricity and postal services markets. Consumer Focus was a consumer policy and advocacy organisation designed to address market-wide problems such as fuel poverty. 1 Comptroller and Auditor General, Protecting consumers – the system for enforcing consumer law, Session 2010–2012, HC 1087, National Audit Office, June 2011, available at: www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/10121087.pdf 2 National priorities mean consumer enforcement work that is directed towards meeting national policy objectives. 6 Part One Update on consumer protection landscape reforms • Citizens Advice, an independent charity with a network of its bureaux across England and Wales, provides free and independent consumer advice. To provide consumer advice and information, Citizens Advice received 75 per cent of its funding from BIS in 2011-12 and was accountable to BIS for this spending. • The Trading Standards Institute (TSI) gathered trading standards professionals to discuss priorities for consumer protection enforcement. • The Competition Commission was a competition body that investigated particular markets that cause harm to consumers. All of its inquiries followed referral from other organisations, mainly the OFT. 1.3 Our 2011 report concluded that the consumer protection landscape was not achieving value for money because the delivery landscape was very fragmented and was therefore not functioning properly. In addition, the report showed that: • Accountability arrangements for achieving national priorities were unclear, demonstrated by poor performance reporting at the system level. • The governance arrangements for the consumer law enforcement system were not clear, as shown by the development of two separate and incompatible national intelligence databases.3 1.4 After the publication of the Committee of Public Accounts’ 2011 report, the government started to plan the consumer protection landscape reforms.4 BIS established the following objectives: • to reduce the complexity surrounding the consumer protection landscape – and the publicly funded institutions that exist to help consumers; • to strengthen the effectiveness of enforcing consumer rights; and • to ensure that activities aimed at empowering consumers are delivered more cost-effectively, in a way that links national and local intelligence about the problems consumers face.5 3 Comptroller and Auditor General, Protecting consumers – the system for enforcing consumer law, Session 2010–2012, HC 1087, National Audit Office, June 2011, p. 11, available at: www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/10121087.pdf 4 HC Committee of Public Accounts, Protecting consumers – the system for enforcing consumer law, Fifty-fourth Report of Session 2010–2012, HC 1468, October 2011, available at: www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/ cmpubacc/1468/1468.pdf 5 House of Commons Library, Government proposals to change the consumer landscape, Commons Library Standard Note SN/HA/6021, January 2012, available at: www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06021.pdf Update on consumer protection landscape reforms Part One 7 Figure 1 The consumer protection landscape in 2011 Department for Communities Department for Business, HM Treasury and Local Government Innovation & Skills (consumer policy lead) Local authorities Trading Consumer Competition Standards Focus/Futures – Commission Institute £18m for 2010-11 (including £12.6m from BIS) Trading Standards Services – Office of Fair Trading – Partnership and (£213m for 2009-10) and regional groups coordination £26m (of which £13m for Consumer Direct (Scambusters, Illegal Money Lending Teams, etc.) £8m until March 2012). Citizens Advice Service £62.7m during 2011-12 (including £47m from BIS: grant in aid, investment in infrastructure, face-to-face debt advice, and transition funding for additional consumer functions. BIS also provided £4.6m for Citizens Advice Scotland) Funding Accountability Local priorities National and regional priorities National priorities Notes 1 BIS – Department for Business, Innovation & Skills. 2 Total expenditure for Trading Standards Services covers
Recommended publications
  • Protecting Europe Against Large-Scale Cyber-Attacks
    HOUSE OF LORDS European Union Committee 5th Report of Session 2009–10 Protecting Europe against large-scale cyber-attacks Report with Evidence Ordered to be printed 9 March 2010 and published 18 March 2010 Published by the Authority of the House of Lords London : The Stationery Office Limited £price HL Paper 68 The European Union Committee The European Union Committee of the House of Lords considers EU documents and other matters relating to the EU in advance of decisions being taken on them in Brussels. It does this in order to influence the Government’s position in negotiations, and to hold them to account for their actions at EU level. The Government are required to deposit EU documents in Parliament, and to produce within two weeks an Explanatory Memorandum setting out the implications for the UK. The Committee examines these documents, and ‘holds under scrutiny’ any about which it has concerns, entering into correspondence with the relevant Minister until satisfied. Letters must be answered within two weeks. Under the ‘scrutiny reserve resolution’, the Government may not agree in the EU Council of Ministers to any proposal still held under scrutiny; reasons must be given for any breach. The Committee also conducts inquiries and makes reports. The Government are required to respond in writing to a report’s recommendations within two months of publication. If the report is for debate, then there is a debate in the House of Lords, which a Minister attends and responds to. The Committee has seven Sub-Committees which are: Economic and
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED KINGDOM 1. Consumer Policy Institutions
    UNITED KINGDOM 1. Consumer policy institutions ................................................... 2 1.1. MINISTRY RESPONSIBLE FOR CONSUMER POLICY ......................................................................... 2 1.2. PUBLIC AGENCIES......................................................................................................................... 3 1.3. NATIONAL CONSUMER ORGANISATIONS....................................................................................... 8 1.4. NATIONAL COUNCILS/ASSEMBLIES OF CONSUMER ORGANISATIONS AND OTHER STAKEHOLDERS 10 1.5. CONSUMER MEDIA ..................................................................................................................... 12 1.6. REDRESS BODIES: COURTS AND ADRS ....................................................................................... 12 1.7. EUROPEAN CONSUMER CENTRE.................................................................................................. 13 1.8. SELF OR CO-REGULATION........................................................................................................... 14 2. Consumer policies................................................................... 20 2.1. CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGISLATION ...................................................................................... 20 2.2. CONSUMER ORGANISATIONS ..................................................................................................... 25 2.3. ENFORCEMENT/REDRESS ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Empowering and Protecting Consumers Consultation On
    Empowering and protecting consumers Consultation on institutional changes for provision of consumer information, advice, education, advocacy and enforcement Response from Citizens Advice and Citizens Advice Scotland September 2011 Myddelton House | 115-123 Pentonville Road | London | N1 9LZ | Tel: 020 7833 2181 | Fax: 020 7833 4371 | www.citizensadvice.org.uk: 7833 2181 2 1. Introduction 1.1 Citizens Advice and Citizens Advice Scotland welcome the Government’s consultation on reform of the consumer landscape. 1.2 We wish to ensure that the outcome provides consumers with access to the best possible information and high quality individual advice about their rights; that consumers have powerful advocates representing their views to the Government, industry and regulators; and that there are strong enforcement and consumer protection agencies ensuring fair and effective markets, basing this work wherever possible on evidence that our organisations obtain from providing services to consumers. 1.3 The Government has proposed some significant reforms to the consumer landscape so that in future the organisations which have the brief to look after and advocate for the consumer interest are those which are best known and trusted by consumers, are evidence based and have their feet firmly on the ground. 1.4 We agree that consumer advocates should have strong support from consumers, and citizens, if they are to have the right to speak on their behalf to influence businesses, regulators and governments. 1.5 To earn this support and trust, consumer advocates need to be totally rooted in and in touch with the consumer community; passionate about getting the best deal for consumers, whoever they are and whatever the issue, and competent and creative in arguing for and securing solutions.
    [Show full text]
  • Report for OFT on Markets with Bidding Processes
    Markets with bidding processes Economic discussion paper May 2007 Report prepared for the OFT by DotEcon Ltd OFT923 Markets Characterised by Bidding Processes © Crown copyright (2007) This publication (excluding the OFT logo) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided that it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as crown copyright and the title of the publication specified. Report prepared for the OFT by DotEcon Ltd 2 FOREWORD This report was commissioned by the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) from DotEcon Ltd. They were asked to prepare a report setting out the implications for the analysis of competition when a market is characterized by bidding process and provide a guide to the qualitative and quantitative analysis of such markets . Any views expressed in this report are those of DotEcon Ltd and do not necessarily reflect the views of the OFT nor the legal position under existing competition law which the OFT applies in exercise of its competition law enforcement functions. This report is part of the OFT's Economic Discussion Paper series, and is intended to inform current discussion within the competition policy community in the UK about cooperation between purchasers. If you would like to comment on the paper, please write to me, Amelia Fletcher, at the address below. The OFT welcomes suggestions for future research topics on all aspects of UK competition and consumer policy. Dr Amelia Fletcher Chief Economist Office of Fair Trading Fleetbank House 2-6
    [Show full text]
  • INTERNATIONAL PROFILES of Health Care Systems, 2013
    INTERNATIONAL PROFILES OF HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS, 2013 AUSTRALIA, CANADA, DENMARK, ENGLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, JAPAN, THE NETHERLANDS, NEW ZEALAND, NORWAY, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, AND THE UNITED STATES EDITED BY SARAH THOMSON, LONDON SchOOL OF ECONOMIcs AND POLITICAL SCIENCE, ROBIN OSBORN, THE COMMONWEALTH FUND, DAVID SQUIRES, THE COMMONWEALTH FUND, AND MIRAYA JUN, LONDON SchOOL OF ECONOMIcs AND POLITICAL SCIENCE NOVEMBER 2013 THE COMMONWEALTH FUND is a private foundation that promotes a high performance health care system providing better access, improved quality, and greater efficiency. The Fund’s work focuses particularly on society’s most vulnerable, including low- income people, the uninsured, minority Americans, young children, and elderly adults. The Fund carries out this mandate by supporting independent research on health care issues and making grants to improve health care practice and policy. An international program in health policy is designed to stimulate innovative policies and practices in the United States and other industrialized countries. INTERNATIONAL PROFILES OF HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS, 2013 AUSTRALIA, CANADA, DENMARK, ENGLAND, FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, JAPAN, THE NETHERLANDS, NEW ZEALAND, NORWAY, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, AND THE UNITED STATES EDITED BY SARAH THOMSON, LONDON SchOOL OF ECONOMIcs AND POLITICAL SCIENCE, ROBIN OSBORN, THE COMMONWEALTH FUND, DAVID SQUIRES, THE COMMONWEALTH FUND, AND MIRAYA JUN, LONDON SchOOL OF ECONOMIcs AND POLITICAL SCIENCE NOVEMBER 2013 Abstract: This publication presents overviews of the health care systems of Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United States. Each overview covers health insur- ance, public and private financing, health system organization and governance, health care quality and coordination, disparities, efficiency and integration, use of information technology and evidence-based practice, cost containment, and recent reforms and inno- vations.
    [Show full text]
  • Powerful Partnerships
    Powerful Partnerships How Trading Standards and Citizens Advice Bureau can achieve more by working together for consumers About Consumer Empowerment Partnerships Consumer Empowerment Partnerships (CEPs) are networks led by a Citizens Advice Bureau. They provide local leadership and work closely with partners, in particular the Trading Standards Service, to improve consumer protection and empowerment through shared information on consumer problems, education and advocacy. There are eleven CEPs across England. North West – Cheshire West CEP; North East – Newcastle CEP; Yorkshire and Humber – Hull CEP; Central (regional lead) – Coventry CEP; Central – BRANCAB CEP; East Midlands – Northampton CEP; East – Cambridgeshire CEP; London – Citizens Advice-led CEP; South East (regional lead) – Kent CEP; South East – Oxfordshire CEP; South West – Plymouth CEP For more on CEPs visit www.citizensadvice.org.uk/ceps Working together for the same consumers Trading Standards and Citizens Advice Bureau are working to help the same local people – those being scammed, targeted by doorstep fraudsters, ripped-off by rogue traders or struggling to get a fair deal. The Citizens Advice service • offers individual advice on consumer problems; • runs consumer education workshops and awareness-raising campaigns; • undertakes advocacy campaigning to get consumers a fair deal. Trading Standards can take tough enforcement action against criminals and bring rogue businesses into line. In many areas, they can also offer advice to consumers and engage in preventative education work. Both Trading Standards and Citizens Advice Bureau are part of a national network, but the services are different in every area reflecting local needs and pressures. Together we have an unparalleled understanding of what local consumers need to feel both empowered and protected.
    [Show full text]
  • Qhe the Consumer Movement, Wealth
    QhE (The Consumer Movement, Wealth, and the Pharmaceutical °Industry~ The sixth in a series of Office of Health Economics monographs dealing with aspects of the prescription medicine market in Britain David Taylor •• IF _J m- • •Ill • /. - • : . •.. 11 . • • • • . • IS?" ' Wffiffl • m§M" : fifittJ ''Ms, ' >®P . i • '••. : . „ . > ' ' : . ' . §i . |||| wmammmmm-. The Consumer Movement, ^Health, and the Pharmaceutical <7hdustry" The sixth in a series of Office of Health Economics monographs dealing with aspects of the prescription medicine market in Britain David Taylor QhE Office of Health Economics 12 Whitehall, London SWIA 2DY Telephone 01—930 9203 Office of Health Economics The Office of Health Economics was founded in 1962 by the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry. Its terms of reference are: To undertake research on the economic aspect of medical care. To investigate other health and social problems. To collect data from other countries. To publish results, data and conclusions relevant to the above. The Office of Health Economics welcomes financial support and discussions on research problems with any persons or bodies interested in its work. Previous publications in this series: The Canberra Hypothesis; the economics of the prescription medicine market. £ 1.50 Brand Names in Prescribing. 5op Sources of Information for Prescribing Doctors in Britain. £1.00 Pharmaceutical Prices; a continental view. £1.00 A Question of Balance; the benefits and risks of pharmaceutical innovation. £1.50 Price £2.00 ©January 1983, Office of Health Economics ISSN 0473 8837 Printed in England by White Crescent Press Ltd, Luton Introduction In his Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, which was first published in 1776, Adam Smith BOX I Industry's reactions to the consumer placed special emphasis on the assertion that the ultimate movement purpose of producing any good (or service) is to meet the Esther Peterson held positions as a union lobbyist, as an needs of its consumers.
    [Show full text]
  • Policy Instruments for Resource Efficiency Towards Sustainable Consumption and Production
    Policy Instruments for Resource Efficiency Towards Sustainable Consumption and Production Preface 1 Introduction 3 I. Regulatory Instruments I. 1 1. Norms and Standards I. 1 Case Study: European Directive on Waste from Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE), European Union 2. Environmental Liability I. 7 Case Study: EU Environmental Liability Directive, European Union 3. Environmental Control and Enforcement I. 13 II. Economic Instruments II. 1 1. Environmental Taxes II. 1 Case Study: Trade Tax Reductions for Cleaner Production at Municipal Level, Paraguay Case Study: United Kingdom Landfill Tax, United Kingdom 2. Fees and User-Charges II. 9 3. Certificate Trading II. 13 Case Study: European Union Greenhouse Gas Emission Trading Scheme, European Union 4. Environmental Financing II. 19 Case Study: Environmental Fund Tunisia - Promotion with grant financing, Tunisia Case Study: KfW - Environmental Programme Promotion with preferential credit terms, Germany 5. Green Public Procurement II. 27 6. Subsidies II. 31 Case Study: Promotion of Solar Home Systems in Bangladesh, Bangladesh III. Research & Educational Instruments III. 1 1. Research and Development III. 1 Case Study: Environment-driven Business Development in Sweden, Sweden 2. Education and Training III. 7 IV. Cooperation Instruments IV. 1 1. Technology Transfer IV. 1 2. Voluntary Agreements IV. 5 Case Study: Voluntary Commitments in Chile (APLs), Chile V. Informational Instruments V. 1 1. Eco-labelling V. 1 Case Study: European Union Energy Label, European Union Case Study: Forest Stewardship Council Label (FSC), International 2. Sustainability Reporting V. 9 Case Study: The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), International 3. Information Centres V. 15 Case Study: Effizienz-Agentur NRW (EFA), Germany 4.
    [Show full text]
  • The Evolution of News and the Internet
    Unclassified DSTI/ICCP/IE(2009)14/FINAL Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 11-Jun-2010 ___________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________ English - Or. English DIRECTORATE FOR SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INDUSTRY COMMITTEE FOR INFORMATION, COMPUTER AND COMMUNICATIONS POLICY U DSTI/ICCP/IE(2009)14/FINAL nclassified Working Party on the Information Economy THE EVOLUTION OF NEWS AND THE INTERNET English - Or. English JT03285390 Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format + DSTI/ICCP/IE(2009)14/FINAL FOREWORD This report was presented to the Working Party on the Information Economy (WPIE) in December 2009 and was declassified subject to minor revisions by the Committee for Information, Computer and Communications Policy in March 2010. The report was prepared by Sacha Wunsch-Vincent in conjunction with Graham Vickery of the OECD‘s Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry. Cristina Serra Vallejo (OECD) and Soo Youn Oh (Seoul National University, Korea) have contributed to the research of this study. The report has benefitted from multiple inputs provided by delegations and external experts as referenced in the ‗Background‘ section. This work is part of the WPIE‘s work on digital broadband content under the overall direction of Graham Vickery. Other studies in the series include scientific publishing, music, online computer games, mobile content, user-created content, film and video, public sector information and content, and work on virtual worlds. It is published on the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the OECD. © OECD, 2010 2 DSTI/ICCP/IE(2009)14/FINAL TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • An Overview of International Cyber-Security Awareness Raising
    An overview of international cyber-security awareness raising and educational initiatives Research report commissioned by the Australian Communications and Media Authority MAY 2011 communicating | facilitating | regulating Canberra Melbourne Sydney Purple Building Level 44 Level 15 Tower 1 Benjamin Offices Melbourne Central Tower Darling Park Chan Street 360 Elizabeth Street 201 Sussex Street Belconnen ACT Melbourne VIC Sydney NSW PO Box 78 PO Box 13112 PO Box Q500 Belconnen ACT 2616 Law Courts Queen Victoria Building Melbourne VIC 8010 Sydney NSW 1230 T +61 2 6219 5555 F +61 2 6219 5353 T +61 3 9963 6800 T +61 2 9334 7700 F +61 3 9963 6899 1800 226 667 TTY 03 9963 6948 F +61 2 9334 7799 © Commonwealth of Australia 2011 This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted under the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission from the Commonwealth. Requests and enquiries concerning reproduction and rights should be addressed to the Manager, Editorial Services, Australian Communications and Media Authority, PO Box 13112 Law Courts, Melbourne Vic 8010. Published by the Australian Communications and Media Authority An Overview of International Cyber-Security Awareness Raising and Educational Initiatives Authors: Chris Connolly Alana Maurushat David Vaile Peter van Dijk Additional research: Stephanie Cuevas Melissa Wong 2011 A Galexia research report, with assistance from the Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre at the University of New South Wales – commissioned and funded by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA) www.galexia.com Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre An Overview of International Cyber-Security Awareness Raising and Educational Initiatives Contents 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Explanatory Document to the Public Bodies
    EXPLANATORY DOCUMENT TO THE PUBLIC BODIES (THE OFFICE OF FAIR TRADING TRANSFER OF CONSUMER ADVICE SCHEME FUNCTION AND MODIFICATION OF ENFORCEMENT FUNCTIONS) ORDER 2013 2013 No. XXXX 1. This explanatory document has been prepared by the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) and is laid before Parliament under section 11(1) of the Public Bodies Act 2011 (“PBA”). 2. Purpose of the instrument 2.1. The purpose of this instrument is to make amendments to statutory provisions to finalise the transfer of the consumer advice scheme function from the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) to Citizens Advice1 and to Citizens Advice Scotland (the Citizens Advice Services) and to make minor modifications to a number of the enforcement functions of the OFT2. We are also changing the provisions for the dissemination of information on the operation of two sets of Regulations3. 2.2. These changes are part of a series of measures being taken following reviews by the Department in 2011 of the consumer and competition bodies. The Enterprise Regulatory Reform Bill (ERR), which is currently passing through Parliament, will abolish the OFT and Competition Commission (CC) from April 2014 and replace them with the Competition Markets Authority (CMA). A second Public Bodies Act order will be laid in draft next year and will amongst other things, make provision for the transfer of OFT’s estate agency functions, and the transfer of Consumer Focus functions. The OFT’s consumer credit functions are due to be transferred to the Financial Conduct Authority using powers in the Financial Services Bill. 2.3.
    [Show full text]
  • Consumer Dialogue
    ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES PRODUCER CONSUMER DIALOGUE OPINION Brussels 1984 The European Communities' Economic and Social Committee, chai' red by Mi Frangois CEYRAC, approved this own'initiative Opinion at its-217fi Plehary Session of 23 and 24 May 1984. The preliminary work was done by the Section for Protection of the Enviionment, Public Health and Gonsumer Affairs with Mr G.H.E. HILKENS as Rappporteur. ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMIfiEE OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES PRODUCER CONSUMER DIALOGUE OPINION Brussels, October 1984 This publication is also available in : Danish, Dutch, French, German, Greek and ltalian. A bibliographical slip can be found at the end of this volurne. Texts appearing in this document may be reproduced freely in whole or in part, so long as their source is mentioned. Gatalogue Number : ESC-84-011-EN CONTENTS Preface I A. OPINION OF THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE ON THE PRODUCER . CONSUMER DIALOGUE ........... 1 B. REPORT OF THE SECTION FOR PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT, PUBLTC HEALTH AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS ....... 7 l. Introduction 7 ll. Development of Community Consumer Policy I lll. Pointsof view 10 lV. The Consumer in the Market Economy : Basic Conditions for Dialogue 14 V. The Situation in the Member States 18 Vl. Classification of Forms of Dialogue in the Member States 18 Vll. Consultation procedures at Community level 22 Vlll. The Dialogue at Gommunity Level ' Conclusions 25 C. APPENDIX TO THE REPORT BELGIUM 27 DENMARK 32 FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF GERMANY ........... 34 GREECE 38 FRAN CE 39 IRELAN D 42 ITALY 45 LUXEM BOURG 47 N ETH ERLANDS ....,.... 49 UNITED KINGDOM 52 PREFACE In a market economy consumers must have a free choice of goods and.services and at the same time enjoy adequate protec' tion.
    [Show full text]