Have you filed a complaint with your bank or your insurance company, and you find that they are taking a bit too long to answer you? Patience, things should change soon! The regulator of the French Prudential Control and Resolution Authority (ACPR) issued a recommendation last May aimed at ensuring faster, easier, more fluid, in a word more efficient, follow-up of complaints received by banks and insurance companies. But what exactly is the role and weight of the ACPR; and what is the exact content of this recommendation? Some clarifications in the following lines…
Disputes with banks and insurance handled faster / iStock-psisa
Origin and role of the ACPR
Created on March 9, 2010 under the name ACP (Prudential Supervisory Authority), this institution resulting from the merger of supervisory authorities of the banking and insurance sectors and licensing authorities became the ACPR in 2013. This authority, backed by the Banque de France and endowed with expanded powers, was set up to respond to the new challenges that emerged after the 2008 financial crisis. The ACPR was thus tasked with ensuring the preservation of stability of the financial system, with the aim of preventing the occurrence of any new financial crises. In addition, the ACPR is also responsible for combating money laundering and the financing of terrorism. Finally, it ensures the protection of all users – customers, policyholders, members and beneficiaries – subject to its control. To accomplish its missions, the ACPR has a General Secretariat bringing together all the operational departments, several decision-making bodies, a supervisory and resolution college, and a sanctions commission…. Because L he ACPR also has the power to decide on penalties and to take administrative police measures to apply them.
Make life easier for “complainants”
It was an article published on May 10 in Les Echos which relayed the information: a draft recommendation from the ACPR intended to make life easier for “complainants” vis-à-vis their banks and insurance companies would have seen the day. In doing so, the institution is responding to strong demand from consumer associations. The recommendation relates, in particular, to a reminder of the rules of good conduct enacted in 2011, and the maximum period for responding to complaints of two months. If on these two points, the regulator is content, in reality, to recall the existing, it integrates, in addition, a real novelty. It concerns easier access to mediation for the “complainant”. In fact, if ACPR’s draft recommendation is validated, the user may request a mediator from the end of the second month following his complaint. He will also be better informed because all letters sent by establishments will now have to mention this possibility of seizing the mediator. Finally, the ACPR recommends the implementation of corrective actions, designed after studying the malfunctions identified via the complaints received and processed.