On 4 December, the Competitiveness Council discussed, and generally supported the Commission’s 2008 proposal for a directive on consumer rights.
The Commission wants to harmonise consumer rights as regards information about the goods, rights in the event of late delivery or non-delivery, cooling-off periods, returns, refunds, repair terms and guarantees. Consequently, member states would be prohibited from keeping or introducing provisions in their national law which differ from the proposed Directive, whether those provisions provide for more or less stringent consumer protection requirements. Whereas some member states, including the UK are concerned about the full harmonization consequences others favour full harmonization. If the current proposal is adopted the UK would have to amend any existing legislation which exceeds or provides less protection than the level of consumer protection provided by the directive. In fact, some of the UK existing consumer protection measures go beyond the proposed directive terms, therefore it would have to lower consumer’s protection.
Moreover, several member states have raised concerns over the proposed rules on delivery and faulty goods. The Commission has proposed the same standard set of remedies available to all consumers who have bought a faulty product. Under the draft directive where goods do not conform, repair and replacement is the first option and the consumer would only be entitled to a refund in restricted circumstances. Hence, the trader may provide a remedy by repairing or replacing the product. Under certain circumstances such as if the trader refuses to remedy the lack of conformity or fails to do so in a reasonable time, the consumer would be entitled to have a reduction of the price or rescind the contract and claim damages. Consequently, the UK would be required to repeal consumers’ existing right, in national law, to reject faulty goods. Hence, consumers in the UK would no longer have a legal right to reject goods of unsatisfactory quality and being reimbursed.
Member States broadly support the proposal wider definitions of distance contracts and off premises contracts as well as right of withdrawal. The majority of the member states are willing to endorse common rules on the right of withdrawal as well as a 14 day right of withdrawal for consumers both for distance and off premises contracts. The House of Lords European Union Committee is concerned that the right of withdrawal might affect the UK 45-day cooling-off period for warranties.
Moreover, the majority of the member states believe that immovable property and financial services should not be covered by the directive.
Whilst consumer organizations are concerned that the proposal might undermine national consumer rights businesses organizations are worried about administrative burdens.
It remains to be seen what will come out from the negotiations. According to Malcolm Harbour, chairman of the European Parliament's consumer affairs committee, the European parliament "will not accept any move that undermines" consumer rights. Moreover, he said "By the time this directive has left parliament, I do not believe it will pose a threat to our right to a refund." Nevertheless, QMV is required at the Council and the Government might not be able to build a blocking minority in order to prevent a reduction in consumer protection for UK consumers.
