A Critical Assessment of the Need for Harmonization of the Legal Framework Concerning Abusive Informal Debt Collection Practices in the European Union: Is Harmonization Possible and How Can it Best Be Attained?

IF 1.4 Q3 BUSINESS
JOURNAL OF CONSUMER POLICY Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-08-30 DOI:10.1007/s10603-021-09495-z
C-G Stănescu
{"title":"A Critical Assessment of the Need for Harmonization of the Legal Framework Concerning Abusive Informal Debt Collection Practices in the European Union: Is Harmonization Possible and How Can it Best Be Attained?","authors":"C-G Stănescu","doi":"10.1007/s10603-021-09495-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The loss of jobs and the decline in real incomes caused by the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic have affected consumers' ability to repay their debts. These have led to high ratios of non-performing loans (NPLs), which affect the stability of the financial industry and undermine economic recovery. The result has been a need for faster debt enforcement and a drastic increase in abusive informal debt collection practices (IDCPs). In the EU, the need to regulate and harmonize abusive IDCPs surfaced in 2018 in connection to the Proposal for a Directive on Credit Servicers, Credit Purchasers and the Recovery of Collateral (CSDP). The directive would enable banks to outsource the servicing of NPLs to a specialized debt collector, but it contained no protection rules against abusive IDCPs. In this article, the researcher critically assesses the need for harmonization of the legal framework concerning abusive IDCPs in the EU, mainly from the standpoint of the initial and current text of the CSDP. Where necessary, the researcher will refer to both historical and comparative law perspectives. The researcher focuses on the legal character of informal debt collection, its relation to financial services, and its potential sui generis character. After that, the researcher will address the arguments for and against establishing pan-EU sector-specific legislation dedicated to IDCPs. Next, the researcher discusses the constitutional authority of the EU to regulate abusive IDCPs. Finally, the researcher will examine the interaction of the CSDP with other consumer (financial) protection instruments to identify the best solution for harmonizing abusive IDCPs at the EU level. The researcher will juxtapose several dichotomies: general versus sector-specific, procedural versus substantive, minimum versus maximum harmonization, and hard versus soft regulation. In the conclusion, the researcher shall synthesize the core problems and suggest an approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":47436,"journal":{"name":"JOURNAL OF CONSUMER POLICY","volume":"44 4","pages":"531-557"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8404024/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JOURNAL OF CONSUMER POLICY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-021-09495-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The loss of jobs and the decline in real incomes caused by the 2008 financial crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic have affected consumers' ability to repay their debts. These have led to high ratios of non-performing loans (NPLs), which affect the stability of the financial industry and undermine economic recovery. The result has been a need for faster debt enforcement and a drastic increase in abusive informal debt collection practices (IDCPs). In the EU, the need to regulate and harmonize abusive IDCPs surfaced in 2018 in connection to the Proposal for a Directive on Credit Servicers, Credit Purchasers and the Recovery of Collateral (CSDP). The directive would enable banks to outsource the servicing of NPLs to a specialized debt collector, but it contained no protection rules against abusive IDCPs. In this article, the researcher critically assesses the need for harmonization of the legal framework concerning abusive IDCPs in the EU, mainly from the standpoint of the initial and current text of the CSDP. Where necessary, the researcher will refer to both historical and comparative law perspectives. The researcher focuses on the legal character of informal debt collection, its relation to financial services, and its potential sui generis character. After that, the researcher will address the arguments for and against establishing pan-EU sector-specific legislation dedicated to IDCPs. Next, the researcher discusses the constitutional authority of the EU to regulate abusive IDCPs. Finally, the researcher will examine the interaction of the CSDP with other consumer (financial) protection instruments to identify the best solution for harmonizing abusive IDCPs at the EU level. The researcher will juxtapose several dichotomies: general versus sector-specific, procedural versus substantive, minimum versus maximum harmonization, and hard versus soft regulation. In the conclusion, the researcher shall synthesize the core problems and suggest an approach.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

对欧盟关于滥用非正式债务催收做法的法律框架协调必要性的批判性评估:协调是否可能以及如何才能最好地实现?
2008年金融危机和2019冠状病毒病大流行造成的失业和实际收入下降影响了消费者的偿债能力。这导致不良贷款率居高不下,影响了金融业的稳定,阻碍了经济复苏。其结果是需要更快地执行债务,以及滥用非正式追债做法(IDCPs)的急剧增加。在欧盟,监管和协调滥用idcp的必要性在2018年浮出水面,这与信贷服务机构、信贷购买者和抵押品回收(CSDP)指令提案有关。该指令将使银行能够将不良贷款的服务外包给专门的收债人,但它没有包含防止滥用idcp的保护规则。在本文中,研究人员主要从CSDP的初始文本和当前文本的角度,批判性地评估了欧盟关于虐待境内流离失所者的法律框架协调的必要性。必要时,研究人员将参考历史和比较法的观点。研究人员着重于非正式债务催收的法律性质,其与金融服务的关系,以及其潜在的独特性质。在此之后,研究人员将讨论支持和反对建立专门针对idcp的泛欧盟部门特定立法的论点。接下来,研究人员讨论了欧盟监管滥用idcp的宪法权威。最后,研究人员将研究CSDP与其他消费者(金融)保护工具的相互作用,以确定在欧盟层面协调滥用idcp的最佳解决方案。研究人员将并列几种二分法:一般与特定部门,程序与实质性,最小与最大协调,硬监管与软监管。在结论部分,研究者应综合核心问题并提出解决方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
8.70%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal of Consumer Policy is a refereed, international journal which encompasses a broad range of issues concerned with consumer affairs. It looks at the consumer''s dependence on existing social and economic structures, helps to define the consumer''s interest, and discusses the ways in which consumer welfare can be fostered - or restrained - through actions and policies of consumers, industry, organizations, government, educational institutions, and the mass media. The Journal of Consumer Policy publishes theoretical and empirical research on consumer and producer conduct, emphasizing the implications for consumers and increasing communication between the parties in the marketplace. Articles cover consumer issues in law, economics, and behavioural sciences. Current areas of topical interest include the impact of new information technologies, the economics of information, the consequences of regulation or deregulation of markets, problems related to an increasing internationalization of trade and marketing practices, consumers in less affluent societies, the efficacy of economic cooperation, consumers and the environment, problems with products and services provided by the public sector, the setting of priorities by consumer organizations and agencies, gender issues, product safety and product liability, and the interaction between consumption and associated forms of behaviour such as work and leisure. The Journal of Consumer Policy reports regularly on developments in legal policy with a bearing on consumer issues. It covers the integration of consumer law in the European Union and other transnational communities and analyzes trends in the application and implementation of consumer legislation through administrative agencies, courts, trade associations, and consumer organizations. It also considers the impact of consumer legislation on the supply side and discusses comparative legal approaches to issues of cons umer policy in different parts of the world. The Journal of Consumer Policy informs readers about a broad array of consumer policy issues by publishing regularly both extended book reviews and brief, non-evaluative book notes on new publications in the field. Officially cited as: J Consum Policy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信