business attitudes towards enforcement and redress in...

Fla

sh

Eu

rob

aro

me

ter

27

8 –

Th

e G

allu

p O

rga

niz

ati

on

This survey was requested Directorate General Health and Consumers and

coordinated by Directorate General Communication.

This document does not represent the point of view of the European Commission. The

interpretations and opinions contained in it are solely those of the authors.

Flash Eurobarometer

Business attitudes towards

enforcement and redress in

the internal market

Analytical report

Fieldwork: July-August 2009

Report: November 2009

European

Commission

Flash EB Series #278

Business attitudes

towards enforcement and redress in the

internal market

Conducted by The Gallup Organization

upon the request of Directorate General

Health and Consumers

Survey coordinated by the Directorate General Communication

This document does not reflect the views of the

European Commission. The interpretations and opinions contained in it

are solely those of the authors.

THE GALLUP ORGANIZATION

Flash EB No 278 – Business attitudes towards enforcement and redress Analytical report

page 3

Contents

Contents .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 4

1. Main Findings .................................................................................................................................... 5

2. Characteristics of the retailers surveyed ......................................................................................... 9

2.1 Companies having subsidiaries or retail outlets in other EU countries ......................................... 9

2.2 Number and type of retail channels used .................................................................................... 11

2.3 Number of EU countries to which retailers make cross-border sales .......................................... 15

2.4 Adherence to a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or commercial issues 20

3. Information and awareness of legal obligations towards consumers ......................................... 21

3.1 Perceived level of information about consumer and product safety legislation .......................... 21

3.2 Specific knowledge of consumer legislation ......................................................................... 25

3.3 Specific knowledge of product safety legislation ........................................................................ 31

3.4 Finding information about consumer legislation ................................................................ 36

4. Compliance with consumer and product safety legislation ......................................................... 41

4.1 Incidences of non-compliance ..................................................................................................... 41

4.2 Enforcement and market surveillance ......................................................................................... 49

4.3 Perceived compliance monitoring with consumer and product safety legislation ...................... 58

5. Consumer complaints and dispute resolution ............................................................................... 64

5.1 Main issues of consumer complaints ........................................................................................... 64

5.2 Complaints resolved directly with the consumers ............................................................... 67

5.3 Dispute resolution mechanisms ................................................................................................... 69

I. Annex tables ..................................................................................................................................... 79

II. Survey details ................................................................................................................................ 221

III. Questionnaire .............................................................................................................................. 225

Analytical report Flash EB No 278 – Business attitudes towards enforcement and redress

page 4

Introduction

In order to assess business attitudes towards the provisions of enforcement and redress – within

consumer legislation – across the internal market, the Directorate General Health and Consumers (DG

SANCO) decided to poll managers of retail companies, those with at least 10 employees, on several

issues:

their knowledge of their legal obligations towards consumers

their compliance with consumer and product safety legislation

their experience with enforcement and market surveillance actions

their experience with consumer complaints and

the use of and preference for different dispute resolution mechanisms

In this Flash Eurobarometer Business attitudes towards enforcement and redress in the internal market

(No 278), a total of 7,320 managers in the 27 EU Member States, Iceland and Norway, were

interviewed between 16 and 30 July and between 24 and 28 August, 2009 using a fixed-line telephone

methodology. Previous surveys with (partly) similar content were carried out in 2006 (Flash

Eurobarometer 186)1 and 2008 (Flash Eurobarometer 224)

2.

The survey sample was selected randomly but disproportionally, according to two criteria:

Country: EU Member States, Iceland and Norway

Company size: small (10-49 employees), medium (50-249 employees), large (≥250 employees).

The survey covered those companies in sectors that were considered to be likely to have significant

retail activity and be able to sell via distance sales channels3.

The targeted number of interviews varied by the size of the respective country. In about half of the EU

Member States, the targeted sample size was 250. However, in France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain

and the UK, the sample size was increased to 400. In Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Luxembourg, Malta,

Slovenia and Iceland, the targeted number of the main interviews was reduced to 150, while in Ireland,

Lithuania and Norway, the targeted sample size was 200.

Approximately 7 in 10 companies interviewed were small companies (between 10 and 49 employees),

while 22% were medium-sized companies (between 50 and 249 employees) and 9% were large

companies (at least 250 employees). Eligible respondents were general managers and marketing or

commercial managers.

Post-stratification weights were used to restore the artificially-distorted proportions according to

company size and sector. When discussing EU-wide summary estimates, the results of the interviews

have been weighted to correct for the disproportional selection of countries in the starting sample. A

technical note explaining the manner in which Gallup and its partner institutes conducted the survey is

attached in the annex. It provides further details on the interviewing methods employed, the sampling

techniques used and the statistical margins of error.

1 http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_186_en.pdf

2 http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_224_en.pdf

3 For more details, see the technical note in annex.

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_186_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/public_opinion/flash/fl_224_en.pdf


page 5

1. Main Findings

Sales channels and cross-border distance sales

Most retailers in the EU were seen to be using the traditional method of selling goods to

consumers via shops (75%). Nevertheless, only slightly lower numbers (70%) were also engaged

in “distance” selling.

About half of retailers were engaged in Internet-based sales (51%). The use of the telephone as a

sales channel was mentioned by 43% of retailers and mail order (e.g. selling by “post”) was

offered by just over a quarter (29%).

In Ireland, the UK and Denmark, the norm was to offer customers the possibility to purchase

without visiting the company‟s physical store or production site (respectively 87%, 92% and 97%

of retailers engaged in such “distance” selling).

A quarter of EU retailers were conducting cross-border transactions. Retailers who conduct cross-

border trade usually do this in at least four EU Member States (14%). Cross-border sales were most

common in Luxembourg and Austria: in these countries, more than 4 in 10 retailers reported

selling their products or services in at least one other EU country.

Companies with at least 50 employees, those with subsidiaries or outlets in another EU country

and companies using distance sales channels were more involved in cross-border sales.

One-third of retailers answered that they would be interested in making cross-border sales if laws

regulating transactions with consumers were the same across the EU.

Information and awareness of legal obligations towards consumers

In all countries in this study, more than two-thirds of retailers felt they were at least well informed

about their legal obligations towards consumers arising from consumer legislation in force in their

country. Retailers in the EU were nearly as confident when it came to their knowledge of rules and

regulations relating to product safety.

Although many retailers (57%) thought that consumers were at least well informed about

consumer legislation, much more retailers (83%) considered themselves well informed.

Retailers who considered themselves at least well informed about consumer legislation were also

more likely to think that consumers in their country were well informed (62%-65% vs. 33% for

retailers who did not feel well informed).

A large majority (78%) of retailers answered that they knew where to find relevant information or

ask for advice about consumer legislation in force in their country, and 22% knew where to look

for information or advice about consumer legislation in force in other EU countries.

Four in 10 retailers also answered that they had actively searched for information or advice about

consumer legislation in the past two years (e.g. by contacting consumer authorities in writing or by

phone, or by searching the Internet).

Interviewees in larger retail companies (with at least 50 employees) or with subsidiaries or retail

outlets in other EU countries and retailers who agreed to abide by a code of conduct or who felt at

least well informed about consumer legislation were more likely to have actively searched for

information or advice about consumer legislation in the past two years.

Specific knowledge about consumer and product safety legislation

Only about a quarter (23%) of retailers could correctly state the length of the “cooling-off” period

for distance sales in their country, and a similar proportion (26%) knew the exact period during

which consumers have the right to return a defective product.


page 6

Retailers appeared to have a better knowledge about prohibited practices than about the “cooling-

off” period:

o 62% of retailers knew that it is prohibited to describe a product as “free” although it is only

freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number

o 53% correctly answered that advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers

without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale is prohibited in their country

o 49% knew that it is prohibited to include an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in

marketing material.

Nonetheless, 59% of retailers also thought that it was prohibited to make exaggerated statements

in advertisements – but this practice is in fact not prohibited.

A majority of retailers (61%) in the EU thought that a small number of non-food products

currently on the market in their country were unsafe.

A large majority of retailers correctly identified the following statements about product safety as being

true:

o Retailers should disclose contact details of producers/importers of unsafe products to the

authorities (84%),

o Upon the relevant authorities‟ request, retailers must cooperate to prevent risks posed by

products which they supplied (81%), and

o Retailers must immediately notify the relevant authorities about any unsafe products that they

are selling (77%).

However, 86% of interviewees also assumed that retailers must immediately recall unsafe

products from their customers – although they are not obliged to do this.

Compliance with consumer and product safety legislation

When asked whether they complied with all legislation dealing with the economic interests of

consumers, virtually all retailers declared that they did: 70% agreed strongly and 29% agreed.

In almost all countries in this study, a vast majority of retailers also thought that their competitors

acted in accordance with consumer legislation, with respondents in Belgium and Finland having

the firmest view in this matter (86% and 88% respectively).

A fifth of retailers had come across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors in the

past 12 months, and 28% had come across misleading or deceptive advertisements.

Slightly more than a tenth (13%) of retailers were aware that competitors tried to unduly coerce or

pressurise consumers in the past 12 months and the same proportion thought that their competitors

had used unfair consumer contract terms in that period.

Among retailers who sell consumer products4, only 7% said they were aware that their competitors

had knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months.

Although retailers who felt informed about consumer legislation and those who abide by a code of

conduct related to consumer or commercial issues were more likely to agree that their competitors

complied with consumer legislation, they more frequently reported that they had seen breaches of

consumer or product safety legislation by their competitors in the past 12 months.

Enforcement and market surveillance

Less than a sixth (16%) of retailers said that consumer authorities had contacted them in the past

two years in the framework of a general control concerning their national sales, and 13%

mentioned such contacts in the framework of a specific control5. Only a minority (2%) answered

4 Overall, 16% of retailers felt that this question was not relevant to them as they were not selling consumer

products. 5 Specific controls are carried out as a consequence of complaints or suspicions related to a particular trader or

sector whereas general controls are carried out as part of the normal workplan of the enforcer.


page 7

that they had been contacted by consumer authorities in the framework of a general or specific

control concerning their cross-border sales.

Twenty-one percent of retailers had learned about a breach of consumer legislation in their market

through the media in the past two years. However, only 4% had been contacted by consumer

authorities (or consumer organisations) about a possible breach of consumer legislation by their

own company during that period.

Almost 4 in 10 (38%) retailers who sell consumer products declared that they had carried out tests

in the past two years to make sure that products they were selling were safe, while about 3 in 10

(29%) retailers said that the authorities had checked the safety of a product that they were selling.

In all countries, except Belgium, not more than a fifth of retailers were asked by the authorities to

withdraw or recall one of their products in the past two years and not more than a tenth were asked

to issue a public warning about one of their products in the same period.

Perceived compliance monitoring with consumer and product safety legislation

Three-quarters of retailers agreed that public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance

with consumer legislation or product safety legislation in their sector in their country.

Slightly more than 6 in 10 (63%) retailers agreed that consumer NGOs actively monitor

compliance with consumer legislation in their sector in their country and the same proportion

agreed that self-regulatory bodies actively monitor the respect of codes of conduct or codes of

practice in their sector in their country.

Although almost two-thirds (65%) of retailers answered that the media regularly report on

businesses which do not respect consumer legislation, less than a fifth (17%) said they had

changed their commercial practices as a result of a media story.

Consumer complaints

A slim majority of retailers received at least one consumer complaint in the past 12 months.

According to the retailers surveyed, consumers most frequently complained about the price and

the quality of a product or service.

According to almost two-thirds of retailers more than half of the complaints they had received

during the past 12 months were resolved directly with the consumer to their satisfaction. More

than 4 in 10 (43%) retailers said they could satisfactorily resolve all of their consumers‟

complaints directly with the consumers.

Retailers in Latvia and Finland reported the highest rate of directly and satisfactorily resolved

complaints (an average rate of 96% each). Maltese respondents were the least likely to say that

consumers‟ complaints were directly resolved with the consumers to their satisfaction: the average

rate of resolved complaints was only 54% in this country.

Dispute resolution

On average, 8% of retailers in the EU had used ADR mechanisms to settle disputes with

customers in the past two years. Over three-quarters (76%) of retailers who had used ADR

mechanisms in the past two years reported that the outcome of their most recent such case had

been successful.

ADR mechanisms were most frequently used in Norway (32%). In the EU, the proportion of

retailers who had used these mechanisms ranged from less than 1 in 20 in Latvia and Sweden,

Finland, Greece and Italy, to around one in six in Denmark and Malta.

Large companies were more likely to have used ADR mechanisms over the past two years than

smaller ones. Retailers who agreed to abide by a code of conduct and those feeling well informed

about their legal obligations towards consumers were also more likely to have used such


page 8

mechanisms. Respondents from smaller companies were more likely to answer that there had been

no need to use such mechanisms.

In case of a dispute with a group of consumers, about half of retailers said they would prefer to use

ADR mechanisms to resolve the issue: 35% mentioned individual ADR and 13% selected

collective ADR. Only a fifth of retailers would prefer to go to court with a group of consumers in

order to settle a dispute.


page 9

2. Characteristics of the retailers surveyed

For this study, companies were sampled among those engaged in direct retail activity or providing

services targeted at consumers and employing at least 10 people. The survey is therefore only

representative of the Business to Consumer (B2C) sector; it includes a sample of such businesses in

each EU Member State as well as Norway and Iceland. Retail companies and companies from the B2C

service sector were sampled (see eligible NACE codes under “survey details”) and those not selling to

the general public were excluded from the survey. For reasons of simplicity, the surveyed enterprises

will be referred to as retailers throughout this report, although service providers were also included.

The current chapter sets out the basis for the remainder of the report by presenting information on the

following characteristics of the retailers surveyed:

number of subsidiaries or retail outlets in other EU countries,

number and type of sales channels used.

number of EU countries to which retailers make cross-border sales, and

adherence to a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or commercial issues.

2.1 Companies having subsidiaries or retail outlets in other EU

countries

A vast majority (82%) of retailers did not have subsidiaries or retail outlets in other EU countries; only

around 1 in 10 respondents did. More precisely, 3% of retailers had subsidiaries or retail outlets in one

other EU country, 2% in 2 or 3 countries other than the one in which the interview took place, and 5%

in at least four other countries.

Number of EU countries where companies have subsidiaries or retail outlets

82

32

5

8

None

1

2 - 3

4 +

DK/NA

C5. In how many EU countries outside [YOUR COUNTRY] do you have subsidiaries or retail outlets?

Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 10

Individual country results6 showed that more than 9 in 10 retailers in Slovenia, Germany, Austria and

Latvia said they had no business units in the EU outside their own country (between 91% and 95%),

while only half of retailers in Belgium said the same (49%). Other countries with a low proportion of

companies without subsidiaries or outlets in another country were Finland (66%), Hungary (70%) and

Luxembourg (71%).

Roughly a quarter of retailers in Luxembourg (24%) and Slovakia (26%), and about a fifth of retailers

in France, Portugal (both 18%) and Belgium (20%) reported having at least one subsidiary or outlet in

another EU country.

It should, however, be noted that at least one-tenth of interviewees in almost half of the countries in

this study did not know the exact number of countries in which they had subsidiaries or retail outlets:

the proportions of “don‟t know” responses ranged from 1% in Latvia, Portugal and Slovakia to 31% in

Belgium.

95 93 91 91 90 90 88 87 84 82 82 80 80 79 79 78 78 77 76 76 74 74 74 73 71 70 66

49

82 82

4 4 7 7 5 9 9 128

1710 18

13 9 149 15 13 12

6 718

4

2624

3 11

20

14 12

1 3 2 2 5 2 3 28 8

17 12 7

138 10 12

19 198

22

1 5

27 2331

4 6

0

20

40

60

80

100

LV

AT

DE SI

BG

EL

UK

PL

LT

CZ

EU

27

PT IE

MT

ES

CY

DK

EE

NL

RO SE

FR IT SK

LU

HU FI

BE

NO IS

None At least one DK/NA

Number of EU countries where companies have subsidiaries or retail outlets

C5. In how many EU countries outside [YOUR COUNTRY] do you have subsidiaries or retail outlets?Base: all retailers, % by country

Company characteristics

7

The larger – in terms of its workforce – the retailing company, the more likely it was to have

subsidiaries or retail outlets in several EU countries. For example, one in five respondents from

companies with at least 250 employees said that they had subsidiaries or retail outlets in at least four

other EU countries, compared to 7% of respondents in companies with between 50 and 249 employees

and 4% in companies with between 10 and 49 employees.

For further details, see annex table 7b.

6 Country charts in this report show the results for each of the 27 EU Member States, Iceland and Norway. The

“EU27” results present the average result for the 27 EU Member States (without Iceland and Norway) – taking

into account differences in population size across individual Member States. 7 This section – and others discussing results by company characteristics – focuses solely on interviews

conducted in the EU (i.e. they do not include Iceland and Norway).


page 11

2.2 Number and type of retail channels used

Three-quarters of retailers in the

EU used the traditional method of

selling goods to consumers via

shops, and roughly half of them

were engaged in Internet-based

sales (51%).

The use of the telephone as a sales

channel was mentioned by 43% of

retailers. This figure cannot be

compared with earlier results of

Flash Eurobarometers 186 and 224

(conducted in 2006 and 2008) due

to a significant change in question

wording. In the earlier studies, the

corresponding item asked about

the use of “telesales/call centre”,

rather than simply the “phone”, implying a significant sales infrastructure. That gave results that were

about half of the current figure (17%-22% vs. 44%).

Mail order (e.g. selling by “post”) was offered by 29% of retailers and doorstep selling was used by

7%. Finally, a quarter of retailers used other out-of-premises sales channels (e.g. fairs, markets or

street vending).

In-premises sales

Luxemburg (90%), Sweden (92%), Austria and Portugal (both 94%) had the highest proportion of

retailers that offered their goods directly to customers in shops. In Latvia, Spain, Estonia and

Romania, on the other hand, less than two-thirds of retailers used in-premises sales channels to

directly reach consumers.

94 94 92 9086 86 86 85 82 82 81 80 80 80 79 78 75 74 73 72 72 72

68 66 64 62 60 58

84

74

0

20

40

60

80

100

AT

PT

SE

LU

SK

MT

BG

FR

CY SI

IT DK FI

IE PL

HU

EU

27

DE

EL

LT

UK

NL

BE

CZ

RO

EE

ES

LV IS

NO

Used sales channel: In-premises sales

C3. Which of the following sales channels do you use?Base: all retailers, % of mentions by country

Companies’ sales channels

75

51

43

29

7

25

1

In-permises sales

Internet

Phone

Post

Doorstep selling

Other out-of-premises channels

DK/NA

C3. Which of the following sales channels do you use?Base: all retailers, % of mentions, EU27


page 12

Distance sales

Looking at the proportion of retailers who mentioned at least one out-of-premise (“distance”) sales

channel, it was noted that in all countries in this study – except Bulgaria – at least half of retailers used

out-of-premises channels to sell their products or services. In Bulgaria, however, only 43% of retailers

indicated that they used any of the distance sales methods listed in the survey, including the “other

out-of-premises sales channel” option.

In sharp contrast, in Ireland, the UK and Denmark, the norm was to offer customers the possibility to

purchase without visiting the company‟s physical store or production site (respectively 87%, 92% and

97% of retailers engaged in “distance” sales).

When analysing the average number of distance sales channels (i.e. Internet, sales by phone and by

post, doorstep sales) used for retail purposes, it appears that an average retailer in the EU offers at least

one of these channels (1.31; the equivalent figure in 20088 was 1.19). Irish and British retailers were

the respondents making most use of multiple distance sales channels (average number of such

channels, 2.17 and 1.88 respectively), while those in Romania and Bulgaria seemed to be showing less

interest (0.55 and 0.58 respectively).

9792

87

74 74 73 73 73 70 70 69 68 68 67 66 66 65 64 64 62 6158 56 56

52 52 51

43

8379

0

20

40

60

80

100

DK

UK IE DE

AT

MT SI

ES

BE

EU

27

FI

EL

PL

LT

NL

CZ

EE

SE

FR

HU

LV IT SK

CY

LU PT

RO

BG

NO IS

Used sales channel: Proportion of retailers who mentioned at least one distance sales channel


2.1

7

1.8

8

1.4

5

1.4

3

1.3

8

1.3

5

1.3

4

1.3

1

1.2

6

1.16

1.0

8

1.0

8

1.0

6

1.0

5

1.0

4

1.0

3

1.0

2

1.0

1

1.0

1

1.0

1

0.9

9

0.8

4

0.8

3

0.7

9

0.7

9

0.7

4

0.5

8

0.5

5

1.7

7

1.6

0

0

1

2

3

4

5

UK IE

MT SI

FR

AT

DE

EU

27

SE

BE IT DK FI

EL

NL

PL

LT

ES

LU CZ

HU

EE

SK

LV

PT

CY

BG

RO

NO IS

Used sales channel: Average number of distance sales channels

Sum of affirmative answers, C3 _2 – C3_5 distance sales methods


Excluding other out-of-premises channels

8 Note again that caution should be exercised when comparing this figure with earlier results of Flash

Eurobarometer 224 (conducted in 2008) due to a significant change in question wording.


page 13

Analysing country differences for each specific out-of-premise sales channels, it appears that retailers

in the UK and Norway were the most likely to use the Internet as a sales channel (71% and 65%

respectively). In the remaining countries, the proportion of respondents who used the Internet ranged

from about a quarter in Romania (23%), Cyprus (26%) and Bulgaria (27%) to nearly 6 in 10 in

Austria, Ireland and Malta (between 57% and 58%).

71

58 58 57 55 54 54 53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 46 44 4437 35 35 34

31 30 29 27 26 23

65

54

0

20

40

60

80

100

UK

MT IE AT SI

SE

DE

BE

FR

EU

27

DK

NL FI

IT CZ

LT

EL

ES

EE

PL

SK

HU

LU PT

LV

BG

CY

RO

NO IS

Used sales channel: Internet


Sales by phone and by post were most frequently mentioned in the UK and Ireland: 74% and 69%

respectively for phone as a sales channel and 64% and 52% respectively for post. Norway and Iceland

followed with respectively 69% and 57% of retailers using the phone as a sales channel and

respectively 43% and 36% listing post orders.

In Romania, Bulgaria, Latvia and Portugal, on the other hand, only between 14% and 25% of retailers

sold their products or services by phone, while mail order was mentioned as a sales channel by not more

than a tenth of retailers in Denmark, Romania, Cyprus, Latvia and Bulgaria (between 5% and 10%).

7469

5345 45 44 44 43 43 42 41 39 37 35 35 34 33 32 32 31 31 29 28 28

25 23 2114

69

57

0

20

40

60

80

100

UK IE

MT

SE

DE

AT

FR

EU

27

DK FI

SI

BE IT ES

LT

CY

PL

CZ

SK

LU

EL

NL

EE

HU PT

LV

BG

RO

NO IS

Used sales channel: Phone


64

52

37 3531 31 30 29 29

2420 20 18 18 18 18 18 16 14 14 14 12 11 10 9 9 6 5

4336

0

20

40

60

80

UK IE SI

FR

AT

DE

LU

EU

27

MT

SE IT CZ

BE

EL

LT

HU

NL

PL

ES

EE

SK FI

PT

BG

LV

CY

RO

DK

NO IS

Used sales channel: Post



page 14

Doorstep sales were most often used as a sales channel by retailers in Hungary (19%), Latvia and

Poland (18% each), but were only rarely used by retailers in Bulgaria and Norway (1% each),

Lithuania (2%), the Czech Republic, Sweden, Slovakia and Austria (all 3%).

19 18 1813 12 11 11 11 10 10 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 1

13

10

20

40

60

HU

LV

PL

PT

RO

DK

EL SI

IE LU

UK

NL

ES

EU

27

FR

MT

CY

BE IT EE

DE FI

AT

SK

SE

CZ

LT

BG IS

NO

Used sales channel: Doorstep selling



Selling products in a shop was more characteristic of small companies (between 10 and 49 employees)

and of companies with no subsidiaries or outlets in other EU countries. For example, slightly more

than three-quarters (77%) of the latter sold goods to their customers via shops, compared to only 63%

of companies with outlets or subsidiaries in other EU countries.

In turn, companies with more employees and those having outlets or subsidiaries were more likely to

mention each of the distance sales channels listed in the survey. For example, 38% of companies with

at least 50 employees sold their products or services by post, whereas only 28% of companies with

fewer employees offered this option to their customers.



page 15

2.3 Number of EU countries to which retailers make cross-border sales

Current cross-border sales

Roughly 7 in 10 (71%) retailers participating in this study did not sell products or services to customers

in other EU countries. This proportion was lower than measured in 2008 (Flash EB 224: 75%), but

somewhat higher than in 2006 (Flash EB 186: 67%).

Only a quarter also sold to consumers in other EU countries. More precisely, 5% of retailers reported

selling products and services in just one additional country, 6% mentioned two or three other countries

and the largest proportion – 14% – was engaged in cross-border sales in at least four other EU countries.

Number of EU countries where companies make cross-border sales to final consumers, 2008-2009

75

4

6

104

None 1 2 - 3 4 + DK/NA

C6(2009)/Q5(2008)/Q6(2006). To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?

Base: all retailers

71

5

6

14

4

Fl278 (2009)%EU27

Fl224 (2008)%EU27

676

9

14

4

Fl186 (2006)%EU25


page 16

The proportion of retailers not selling to consumers in other EU countries ranged from a slim majority

in Luxembourg (53%) to nearly 9 in 10 retailers in Romania and Bulgaria (both 88%). In Spain,

Finland, Portugal and Latvia, at least 8 in 10 retailers only sold to their home market.

Cross-border sales were most common in Luxembourg and Austria: in these countries, more than 4 in

10 retailers reported selling their products or services in at least one additional EU country.

Furthermore, 22% of retailers in Luxembourg and 17% in Austria sold their products or services in at

least four other EU countries. Retailers in Iceland were, nevertheless, the most likely to sell across

borders in at least four EU countries (26%).

4643

37 35 33 32 32 30 30 29 29 26 25 25 25 24 24 23 2219 18

16 15 15 15 14 128

31

21

53 56 58

65

58

6761

66 67 68 68 6871 70 71

68 6669

7580 79 80

61

8579

86 88 88

62

72

0

20

40

60

80

100

LU

AT IE DE SI

EL

EE

DK

PL

SK

CZ

LT

EU

27

NL

FR

UK

MT

CY IT ES

HU FI

BE

PT

SE

LV

BG

RO IS

NO

Sell to at least one another EU country Sell only to consumers in [country]

Number of EU countries to which companies offer cross-border sales to final consumers

C6. To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?Base: all retailers, % by country

2

12 10 7 8 5 4 7 8 7 4 5 62 5 2 4

0 4 4 5 3 4 3 3 1 2 3 2

21

1312

8 10

7 118 8 9

8 136

9

68

67

24

7 44 5 3 5

4 13 4

22 5

15

19 1520 18 16 14 12 14 10

1410

1712

1712

20 12 87 8 7 9 6

75

26

15

0

20

40

60

LU

AT IE DE SI

EL

EE

DK

PL

SK

CZ

LT

EU

27

NL

FR

UK

MT

CY IT ES

HU FI

PT

BE

SE

LV

BG

RO IS

NO

1 2 - 3 4 +Number of countries:

C6. To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?Base: all retailers, % by country


page 17

Cross-border sales if laws regulating transactions were the same in the EU

In this survey, a hypothetical question was asked – if regulations on cross-border transactions were

harmonised, to how many countries within the EU would retailers sell their products?

One-third of retailers answered that they would be interested in making cross-border sales if laws

regulating transactions with consumers were the same across the EU: 18% would be interested in selling

their products or services in more than 10 Member States, 7% mentioned between four and 10 Member

States and 8% listed between one and three Member States.

The proportion of retailers who answered that they would be interested in making cross-border sales in a

more harmonised regulatory environment was lower than that measured in 2008 (Flash EB 224: 49%)

and in 2006 (Flash EB 186: 48%).

41

516

12

16

10

58

35

7

18

9

Number of EU countries where companies would make cross-border sales if laws regulating transactions were the same in the EU, 2006-2008

46

513

12

18

6

C7(2009)/Q13(2008)/Q17(2006). If the provisions of the laws regulating transactions with consumers were the same througout the 27 Member States to how many EU countries would you be interested in making

cross-border sales to final consumers?Base: all retailers, %EU27

Fl278 (2009)%EU27

Fl224 (2008)%EU27

Fl186 (2006)%EU25

41516121610None 1 2 - 3 4 - 10 10+ DK/NA


page 18

Retailers in Bulgaria were not only the most likely not to sell their products across borders (see above),

they were also the most likely not to be interested in cross-border sales even if regulations on cross-

border transactions were harmonised (75%). Other countries at the higher end of the scale were Finland

(72% “not interested”), Portugal and Italy (both 69%). Nevertheless, even in these countries, the

proportion of retailers who would not be interested in cross-border sales in a more harmonised regulatory

environment was lower than the proportion not currently engaged in cross-border sales.

In Greece, on the other hand, almost half (49%) of retailers answered that they would be interested in

making cross-border sales if laws regulating transactions were the same across the EU. A somewhat

lower proportion was found in Ireland, Poland and Iceland (46%-47%). Respondents in Iceland were –

once again – the most likely to select the highest number of countries (36%).

Finally, it should be noted that a high proportion of retailers in most countries in this study found it

difficult to answer this question: the proportion of “don‟t know” responses ranged from 1% in

Bulgaria and 2% in Germany to 29% in Estonia.

75 72 69 69 67 65 65 64 61 60 59 58 58 57 56 56 56 55 51 50 49 48 48 43 42 40 37 36

63

41

108 12

5 158 10 8

22

1017

1319

9 10 1521 19

17 17 2111 9 21 21

17 2013

10

7

21

5

3

5

5 3 4

4

3

35

9

5 2

88

65 3

3

105

72 9

28

6

3

12

6

10

13

1016

61

2

168 15

5

14 2314 6 18

8

1

18

1118

19

1120

22 28

9

36

113

410

4 616

2211 12 12 9 9

159 8 10

2

1929

820 20

9

2414 19 16 13 13

0

20

40

60

80

100

BG FI

PT IT LV

ES

SE

BE

HU

FR

NL

EU

27

SK

CZ

UK

DK

AT

DE

RO

EE

LU

CY

MT IE LT

PL SI

EL

NO IS

None 1-6 7 -25 26 DK/NA

Number of EU countries where companies would make cross-border sales if laws regulating transactions were the same in the EU

C7. If the provisions of the laws regulating transactions with consumers were the same througout the 27 Member States to how many EU countries would you be interested in making cross-border sales to final consumers?

Base: all retailers, % by country

Although 71% of retailers answered that they currently do not sell across borders, 58% said that they

would not engage in cross-border sales even if regulations were harmonised. It appears, therefore, that

retailers would be somewhat

more open to engaging in cross-

border sales if the risks of failing

to comply with various national

regulations could be eliminated

(i.e. by establishing harmonised

EU rules).

The survey in 2008 (Flash EB

224) reached a similar

conclusion; however, the

difference between actual and

potential engagement in cross-

border trade was larger in that

survey (in 2008, 75% said they

did not sell across borders at the

time of the survey and 41%

would not engage in cross-

border sales even if regulations

were harmonised).

Harmonised regulations boosting cross-border activity

6

8

6

5

71

4

18

7

5

3

58

9

More than 10 EU countries

4-10 EU countries

2-3 EU countries

1 EU country

Not trading cross-border

DK/NA

Current cross-border sales

Interest in cross-border sales, if regulation were harmonised

C6. To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?

C7. If the provisions of the laws regulating transactions with consumers were the same througout the 27 Member States to how many EU countries would you be interested in making cross-border sales to final consumers?

Base: all retailers, % EU27


page 19

The following chart shows that in almost all countries in this study, retailers appear to be more open to

offer their products or services in other EU countries if regulations were harmonised. The difference

between actual and potential engagement in cross-border trade was the largest in Romania: 88% of

retailers in this country did not sell across borders at the time of the survey; however, only 51% said

that they would not engage in such sales even if regulations were harmonised (a difference of 37

percentage points). In Luxembourg, Austria and Belgium, on the other hand, almost no differences

were seen between actual and potential engagement in cross-border trade.

88

67

67 68 69

58

86

66

79

85

80

58

79

88

71

68 71

68

61

70

68

66

65

80

75

53 56 6

1 62

72

51

35 4

0 42

48

37

67

47

61

69

65

43

65

75

58

56 6

0

57

50

59

58

56

55

72

69

49

56

64

41

63

0

20

40

60

80

100

RO

EL

PL

LT

CY SI

LV

MT

HU

PT

ES

IE SE

BG

EU

27

UK

FR

CZ

EE

NL

SK

DK

DE FI

IT LU

AT

BE IS

NO

Not trading cross-border Not interest in cross-border sales, even if regulations were harmonised

Harmonised regulations boosting cross-border activity

C6. To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?C7. If the provisions of the laws regulating transactions with consumers were the same througout the 27 Member

States to how many EU countries would you be interested in making cross-border sales to final consumers?Base: all retailers, % by country


Companies with at least 50 employees, those with subsidiaries or retail outlets in another EU country

and companies using distance sales channels were more involved in cross-border sales. For example,

62% of companies with subsidiaries or outlets in another EU country sold their products or services in

different countries, compared to only 22% of companies without such subsidiaries or outlets.

Furthermore, respondents from the above-mentioned companies were also the ones least likely to state

that they would not be interested in cross-border sales even if the laws regulating transactions were the

same across the EU. For example, 76% of retailers who do not use any distance sales channels

answered that they would not be interested to sell their products or services in other countries,

compared to only half as many (51%) of retailers who do use at least one distance sales channel.

For more details, see annex table 8b and 9b.


page 20

2.4 Adherence to a code of conduct or code of practice related to

consumer or commercial issues

Over a third (36%) of retailers in the EU answered that they subscribed to a code of conduct or a code

of practice related to consumer or commercial issues for their sector or market. The proportion of

adherents ranged from less than a tenth in Poland and Lithuania (5%-6%) to roughly two-thirds in

Slovakia and the Czech Republic (65% and 68% respectively). In six other countries more than half of

retailers abided by a code of conduct or code of practice (ranging from 51% in Ireland and Bulgaria to

60% in Hungary).

68 65 60 59 56 52 51 51 50 4842 41 41 37 36 35 33 33 31

25 21 18 14 14 12 12 6 5

42

21

2423 31

3938 44 41 42 47

42 54 50 55 60 59 6454

6662 73 78

75 81 83 86 8891 90

52

74

8 12 102 6 4 8 7 3

10 4 9 4 3 5 113

1 7 3 18 4 3 2 0 3 5 6 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

CZ

SK

HU

BE

NL

DK

BG IE AT

UK

SE

MT

DE

ES

EU

27

PT FI

LU

EE SI

FR

EL IT CY

RO

LV

LT

PL IS

NO

Yes No DK/NA

Are retailers a member of a code of conduct or a code of practice?

A26. Are you a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or commercial issues for your sector / market?



Retailers with the following characteristics were more likely to subscribe to a code of conduct or a

code of practice related to consumer or commercial issues for their sector or market:

companies with at least 250 employees (43% vs. 36% in companies with between 10 and 49

employees),

those with subsidiaries or retail outlets in other EU countries (43% vs. 36%),

companies engaged in distance selling (39% vs. 31%), and

retailers making cross-border sales to final consumers (39% vs. 35%).

For more details, see annex table 68b.


page 21

3. Information and awareness of legal obligations towards consumers

In this chapter, we look at retailers‟ knowledge of their legal obligations towards consumers –

distinguishing between legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers (in this report

referred to as consumer legislation) and product safety legislation. The first section examines retailers‟

self-perceived level of information on consumer and product safety legislation, while the second and

third section present results of some detailed knowledge questions about these topics (e.g. retailers‟

knowledge of the exact length of the “cooling-off” period for distance sales in their country).

In the last section of this chapter, we analyse retailers‟ need for information about consumer

legislation and their knowledge of where to find relevant information or ask for advice on this topic.

3.1 Perceived level of information about consumer and product safety

legislation

Overall, a large majority of retailers in the EU felt informed about their legal obligations towards

consumers arising from consumer legislation in force in their country: 60% of respondents felt well

informed and 23% said they were fully informed. Only a minority of respondents answered that they

did not feel informed about this topic: 13% said they were not well informed about consumer

legislation and 3% did not feel informed at all.

A similar question in 2008 (Flash EB 224) showed that 59% of retailers felt well informed about their

legal obligations towards consumers and 19% indicated that they were fully informed. The current

survey measured a four percentage point increase in the proportion of retailers who felt fully informed

about the consumer legislation in place in their country.

Self-perceived level of information about legal obligations towards consumers, 2008-2009

19

58

17

4 1

Fully informed

Well informed

Not well informed

Not informed at all

DK/NA

A1(2009)/Q15(2008). How well informed are you about your legal obligations towards consumers arising from consumer legislation in your country?


23

60

13

3 1

Fl224 (2008) Fl278 (2009)


page 22

In all countries in this study, more than two-thirds of retailers felt at least well informed about legal

obligations towards consumers (ranging from 69% in Lithuania to 95% in Slovakia). Retailers in

Belgium, followed by those in Cyprus and Portugal, were the most likely to answer that they were

fully informed about consumer legislation in force in their country (45%, 36% and 34% respectively).

Retailers in France, Poland, Finland and Lithuania, on the other hand, were the ones who most

frequently said they did not feel well informed or did not feel informed at all about this topic (between

24% and 31%).

32 34 29 24 22 22 1827 29

1024

36

18 1828

16

45

2331

13

3118

2920 23

14 13 15 18 22

63 60 6567 67 68 70

61 58

7661

49

67 6656

67

39

6051

69

50

6250

58 5261 60 54

70 60

4 6 6 9 8 8 11 107 11 12 14 15 15 14 14 12 13 13 12 16 16

13 15 15 22 23 26

1211

1 1 1 1 23

3 3 1 1 2 3 4 3 5 3 1 35 5 9 3 3 5

14

0

20

40

60

80

100

SK

PT

BG

LU

RO

EE SI

HU CZ

SE

ES

CY

LV

DE

AT IT BE

EU

27

EL

NL

MT IE UK

DK

FR

PL FI

LT

NO IS

Fully informed Well informed Not well informed Not informed at all DK/NA

Self-perceived level of information about legal obligations towards consumers

A1. How well informed are you about your legal obligations towards consumers arising from consumer legislation in your country?Base: all retailers, % by country

Retailers in the EU were nearly as confident when it came to their knowledge of rules and

regulations relating to product safety: 58% of retailers who sell consumer products9 felt well

informed and a further 22% said they were fully informed on this topic. Only 18% of retailers did not

feel well informed, or did not feel informed at all, about product safety regulations.

Self-perceived level of information about legislation on product safety

22

58

15

3 2Fully informed

Well informed

Not well informed

Not informed at all

DK/NA

A3. How well are you informed about the legislation on product safety?

Base: retailers who sell consumer products, %EU27

9 Overall, 18% of retailers felt that this question was not relevant to them as they did not sell consumer products

(for more details, see annex table 12b).


page 23

Individual country results recording self-perceived level of knowledge of product safety legislation,

however, showed more variation than results measuring familiarity with consumer legislation in

general (see above). While over 9 in 10 retailers in Bulgaria (94%), Luxembourg and (92%) felt at

least well informed about product safety legislation, this proportion decreased to just over half of

retailers in Lithuania and Sweden (51% and 52% respectively). Almost half of respondents in these

countries did not feel well informed, or did not feel informed at all, about this topic (47% and 45%

respectively).

Although Belgian retailers were – once again – among the most likely to answer that they were fully

informed about product safety legislation (39%), retailers in Malta were the most likely to select this

response (44%).

2937 34

20

44

2415

27 24 25 2332

24

39

2133

2233

2616 12

18 2211 16 16 11 13 11 14

65 55 56

69

43

6169

57 59 57 6050

58

42

6047

5847

5359 63 56 49

59 53 49

41 38

61 55

6 7 8 11 10 12 9 16 12 11 12 14 14 14 13 14 15 149 21 20 22

20 23 27 30

30 37

2625

2 1 1 41 4 3 2 1 2 2 1 3 3 7

72 5 3

2 33 4

1510

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

BG

LU

SK

PT

MT

ES

NL

LV

FR

UK IT

HU

AT

BE

RO

CY

EU

27

EL

CZ

DE

DK IE SI

EE FI

PL

SE

LT

NO IS


Self-perceived level of information about legislation on product safety

A3. How well are you informed about the legislation on product safety?Base: retailers who sell consumer products, % by country

A majority of retailers also thought that consumers themselves were at least well informed of their

rights arising from consumer legislation in force in their country: 10% assumed that consumers

were fully informed about such matters and 47% thought that consumers were well informed about

their rights as consumers.

However, 34% of retailers felt that

consumers were not well informed of their

rights, and a further 4% thought that they

were not at all informed.

In other words, although many retailers

thought that consumers were well

informed about consumer legislation, they

appeared to consider themselves better

informed (i.e. at 83%, the proportion of

retailers who said they were themselves at

least well informed about consumer

legislation was considerably higher – see

above).

Anticipated consumer awareness of their rights arising from consumer legislation

10

47

34

44

Fully informed

Well informed

Not well informed

Not informed at all

DK/NA

A2. And how well informed do you think consumers are about their rights arising from consumer legislation in

your country?Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 24

The proportion of retailers who thought that consumers were well informed or fully informed about

their rights arising from consumer legislation ranged from less than 4 in 10 interviewees in Lithuania

and Poland (32% and 39% respectively) to more than three-quarters in Slovakia, Belgium and

Luxembourg (76%, 77% and 78% respectively).

Looking at both retailers‟ self-perceived familiarity with consumer legislation and their perception of

consumers‟ awareness of such legislation, similarities could be seen: the same countries appeared at

the higher and lower ends of the distribution in both cases. There were, however, some exceptions; for

example, although Bulgarian retailers were among the most likely to answer that they themselves were

at least well informed about consumer legislation, they were among the least likely to think that

consumers in Bulgaria were at least well informed about such matters (94% vs. 47%).

19

36

159 12

5 719

3 14 12 814 13 10 12 10 8 5 11 10 3 7 4 7 5 5 6 3 4

59

41

6161 53

60 5744

6149 48 51 44 45 47 45 47 48

4841 42

48 4040 36 37 34 26

5743

16 17 14 27 3327 29 31 31 30 33 36 32 38 34

2435 35

38 37 39 4546

43 4642 50

52

3648

2 21

2 6 3 3 5 3 24

1 4

5

5 4 4 4 62

28 8 14 5

9

2 24 5 10

1 2 2 4 5 4 2 4 3 6 3 414

3 5 6 7 4 1 4 4 3 2 6 7 2 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

LU

BE

SK IE SI

PT

DK

MT

LV

FR

AT

DE

UK

EE

EU

27

CZ

ES IT NL

RO

CY FI

BG

SE

HU

EL

PL

LT

NO IS


Anticipated consumer awareness of their rights arising from consumer legislation

A2. And how well informed do you think consumers are about their rights arising from consumer legislation in your country?



Although interviewees across all types of companies were very likely to answer that they felt at least

well informed about consumer legislation in place in their country (across almost all types of

companies at least 80% of retailers declared that they were well informed or fully informed of their

legal obligations towards consumers), interviewees in some specific company types were somewhat

more likely to consider themselves fully informed about this topic:

those working in companies with at least 250 employees (38% vs. 21% in companies with

between 10 and 49 employees),

those with subsidiaries or retail outlets in other EU countries (30% vs. 21%),

those engaged in distance selling (24% vs. 18%), or

those subscribed to a code of conduct or a code of practice relating to consumer or commercial

issues for their sector or market (30% vs. 18%).

A similar pattern was found when looking at retailers‟ self-perceived familiarity with product safety

legislation.

Only small differences were observed when looking at retailers‟ perceptions of consumers‟ level of

awareness of their rights. Nevertheless, it did appear that retailers who considered themselves at least

well informed about this topic were also more likely to think that consumers in their country were at

least well informed (62%-65% vs. 33% for retailers who did not feel well informed – the correlation

coefficient between the two variables is .238, p<.000).

For more details, see annex tables 10b, 11b and 12b.


page 25

3.2 Specific knowledge of consumer legislation

Length of the “cooling-off” period for distance sales

The “cooling-off” period is the period after the purchase during which a consumer has the legal right to

return a product purchased on the Internet, by phone or post without paying a penalty. This “cooling-off”

period ranges from 7 to 15 calendar days depending on the country where the product is sold.

Only about a quarter (23%) of

retailers could correctly state the

length – in calendar or working days –

of the “cooling-off” period for

distance sales in their country. Almost

4 in 10 retailers (38%) admitted not

knowing the answer to this question

and a similar proportion answered it

incorrectly: 16% gave too short an

estimate, while 23% thought that the

“cooling-off” period was longer than

in the case.

Individual country results showed a

large variation in the proportion of

retailers who knew the exact length of

the “cooling-off” period for distance

sales in their country. While a slim

majority of retailers in Germany (55%) and almost half of respondents in Estonia and France (48%

and 45% respectively) gave a correct answer to this question, the proportion of correct answers was

below 5% in Cyprus, Bulgaria, Spain, Greece, Romania, Ireland and Portugal.

Over 6 in 10 retailers in Hungary, Cyprus and Bulgaria admitted not knowing what the length of the

“cooling-off” period was (between 61% and 75%), while respondents in Spain, Slovenia, the UK and

Portugal were more likely to give an incorrect answer (between 57% and 77%). However, while 57%

of retailers in the UK gave an excessively long estimate for the “cooling-off” period, in the other three

countries, respondents were more likely to think that this period was shorter than legally specified

(between 35% and 44%).

5548 45

37 36 34 29 28 25 24 2317 13 12 11 10 9 9 8 6 6 4 4 4 3 3 1 1

30

15

4 138

11 921

22 18 2722

1617 22 19 26

12

35

3 7

3425

44

719 16

35

20 17

27

14

15 7 18

9 13

88 13 5

7 23 3324

18

25

27

24

37

57 6

8

33

37 19 21

22

419

15

21

2633 28

43 4337 41 41 43 47

38 3341

5138

51

32

51

29

5461

18

5159 60

40

7564

29

50

0

20

40

60

80

100

DE

EE

FR

DK

LV FI

SE

CZ

BE

MT

EU

27

SK

NL

LU PL

LT SI

AT

UK IT

HU PT IE RO

EL

ES

BG

CY

NO IS

correct response stated a shorter duration stated a longer duration could not tell

Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales

A6. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchase on the Internet, phone or post, what is the length of the “cooling-off” period in your country?


Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales

23

16

23

38correct response

stated a shorter duration

stated a longer duration

could not tell

A6. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchase on the Internet, phone or post, what is the

length of the “cooling-off” period in your country? Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 26

Period to return defective products

About a quarter (26%) of retailers knew

the exact period during which consumers

have the right to return a defective product

– this period ranges from two years from

the date of the original purchase in most

EU Member States to six years in the UK

(except Scotland) and Ireland.

Slightly more than 6 in 10 (62%) retailers

gave a wrong answer – about half of these

retailers thought that consumers only have

the right to return a defective product

within one year of the date of the original

purchase. About a tenth (12%) of

interviewees answered that they did not

know what the legal period was to return a

defective product.

As in the case of knowledge of the “cooling-off” period for distance sales, a large variation was observed

across countries in retailers‟ knowledge of the legal period to return defective products. In only three

countries did more than half of retailers correctly answer this question: Slovakia (72%), the Czech

Republic (65%) and Denmark (52%). In sharp contrast, less than a tenth of retailers in Ireland (1%),

Hungary (5%) and the UK (7%) knew the exact period in which consumers have the right to return a

defective product. It was noted earlier that consumers in the UK and Ireland have a longer legal period to

return defective products (six years in Ireland, England and Wales, and five years in Scotland).

7265

5243

37 36 35 35 29 29 29 28 26 26 25 22 21 19 17 16 13 13 13 12 11 7 5 1

2615

21 32

4350

48 4864

51 66

4863 61 60 62 61 63 64 62

74 7571 76

70 75 7877 81 89

65 82

7 3 5 715 16

214

5

239 11 13 12 14 15 15 19

9 1016 12 18 13 10

17 13 10 93

0

20

40

60

80

100

SK

CZ

DK

DE

SE

EE

PT

AT

LV IT ES

PL

MT

EU

27

BE

RO

LU

NL

LT FI

SI

CY

EL

FR

BG

UK

HU IE IS

NO

correct response incorrect response could not tell

Knowledge about the legal period to return a defective product

A7. Please complete the following statement correctly. The consumer has the right to ask for a defective product to be replaced or repaired...Base: all retailers, % by country

Knowledge about the legal period to return a defective product

26

62

12

correct response

incorrect response

could not tell

A7. Please complete the following statement correctly. The consumer has the right to ask for a defective

product to be replaced or repaired...Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 27

Prohibited commercial practices

Over 6 in 10 (62%) retailers knew that it is prohibited to describe a product as “free” although it is only

freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number. About a fifth (22%) thought that this

practice was not prohibited in their country and 17% did not know whether it was prohibited or not.

A somewhat lower proportion (53%) correctly answered that advertising products at a very low price

compared to other offers without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale is prohibited in

their country and about one in two (49%) respondents knew that it is prohibited to include an invoice

or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material. About 3 in 10 retailers thought that

these practices were not prohibited in their country (31% and 29% respectively).

About 6 in 10 (59%) retailers also thought that it was prohibited to make exaggerated statements in

advertisements – but this practice is in fact not prohibited. Only 32% of interviewees correctly

answered that it is not prohibited to make exaggerated statements in advertisements.

Knowledge about prohibited commercial practices

62

53

49

59

22

31

29

32

17

16

23

9

Describing a product as 'free' although it is only freely available to customers calling a

premium rate phone number

Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without having a

reasonable quantity of products for sale

Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material

Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement

Prohibited Not prohibited DK/NA

Not prohibited:

Prohibited:

A8. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR COUNTRY]?



page 28

The proportion of retailers who correctly stated that it is prohibited to include an invoice or a similar

document seeking payment in marketing material ranged from less than a tenth in Bulgaria and

Latvia (7% and 9% respectively) to more than two-thirds in Austria, Denmark, Germany and Finland


Slovakia, France and Lithuania joined Bulgaria and Latvia at the lower end of the distribution with

between 17% and 23% of correct answers. Respondents in France and Bulgaria were the most likely to

think that this practice was not prohibited (63% and 51% respectively), while those in Latvia and

Lithuania most frequently gave a “don‟t know” response (63% and 46% respectively). In Slovakia, on

the other hand, similar numbers of retailers gave an incorrect answer or a “don‟t know” response (41%

and 43% respectively).

72 71 70 68 65 64 64 61 57 5750 50 49 48 47 46 43 43 40 37 33 32 32

23 19 179 7

59

39

15 2214 19

1526 23

10 1725

2821 29 24 23

33 32 3129

27 32

48

30

32

63

41

28

51

28

26

13 817 13

2011 14

29 2618 22

29 23 28 3122 24 26 31 36 35

20

3846

18

43

63

42

13

34

0

20

40

60

80

100

FI

DE

DK

AT

PT

SE SI

EL

HU

BE

NL IT

EU

27

UK

CY

EE IE CZ

PL

ES

RO

LU

MT

LT

FR

SK

LV

BG

NO IS

Prohibited (correct) Not prohibited (not correct) DK/NA

Prohibited: Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material

A8. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR COUNTRY]?Base: all retailers, % by country


page 29

Retailers in Finland and Germany were also among the most likely to correctly answer that

advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without having a reasonable

quantity of products for sale is prohibited in their country (70% and71% respectively), although

retailers in Hungary were the most likely to give a correct answer (85%).

Bulgaria, Latvia and Slovakia – once again – were found at the bottom of the distribution: only 20% of

retailers in Bulgaria and 29% in Latvia and Slovakia knew that it is prohibited in their country to

advertise products at a very low price without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale. In this

case, however, they were joined by retailers in Lithuania, with only 30% answering the question correctly.

8571 70

55 54 53 53 51 50 50 50 49 49 47 46 46 44 43 43 43 41 40 37 3630 29 29

20

6454

822 22

23 2822

31 34 34 37 37 34 32 30 35 36 34 35 41 44 48

32 42 47

43 4358

48

2535

7 7 8

23 1825

16 16 16 14 13 17 19 23 19 18 22 22 16 14 12

2721 17

27 2814

31

11 11

0

20

40

60

80

100

HU

DE FI

IT AT

LU

EU

27

FR

BE

DK

SE

CZ

UK

CY

ES IE PL

EL

EE SI

PT

MT

NL

RO

LT

SK

LV

BG

NO IS


Prohibited: Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale


Looking at the results for the prohibited practice of describing a product as “free” although it is

only freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number, similar differences

appeared again: for example, retailers in Finland and Denmark were the most likely to know that this

practice is prohibited in their country (78% and 82% respectively), while retailers in Bulgaria and

Slovakia were among the least likely to know that it is prohibited (25% and 45% respectively). In

three other countries, less than half of respondents knew that it is prohibited to describe a product as

“free” although it is only freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number: Cyprus

(35%), the Czech Republic (43%) and Lithuania (46%).

82 78 76 71 70 69 67 64 62 62 62 61 59 58 56 56 56 55 54 54 54 52 52 46 45 4335

25

79 77

7 116 17

1220

17 18 22 24 22 25 2332

1930

23 29 3019

33

20 1921

30 36

31

37

14 14

11 1118 12

1811 16 17 16 14 17 15 18

1124

1522 16 16

2713

28 30 3325 21

33 38

7 9

0

20

40

60

80

100

DK FI

HU

DE IT SE

LU

AT

FR IE

EU

27 SI

ES

PT

MT

UK

PL

BE

EE

LV

NL

EL

RO

LT

SK

CZ

CY

BG

NO IS


Prohibited: Describing a product as “free” although it is only freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number



page 30

In half of the countries surveyed, a majority of retailers incorrectly assumed that it was prohibited in

their country to make exaggerated statements in advertisements, with respondents in Hungary,

Norway and Finland leading the way in this view (between 82% and 86%). For each of the

commercial practices listed in this survey, respondents in these countries were among the most likely

to think they were prohibited – independently of the fact whether this was indeed the case or not.

A similar observation could be made when looking at the other end of the country distribution:

respondents in Bulgaria were – once again – the least likely to say that making exaggerated statements

in advertisements was prohibited in their country (29%), and as such they appear to be the most likely

to answer this question correctly.

However, German retailers were actually the most likely to answer this question correctly. Indeed, a

large majority of interviewees in Germany correctly stated that the first three of the listed practices are

prohibited in their country (71% each) – however, only 47% of German interviewees thought that it

was prohibited to make exaggerated statements in advertisements and the same proportion thought the

opposite.

51 50 47 46 45 44 43 41 39 36 36 34 33 32 32 29 28 24 21 20 19 19 17 17 17 15 13 1125

13

2938 47 49

3748 45 49 50

4249 54

5059 59

56 5873

7363 64 70 77 75 78

6882 86

6984

2112 6 4

189 12 11 11

2215 12 17

8 9 15 142 6

17 17 12 6 9 617

5 4 6 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

BG

NL

DE

PT

PL

CZ

AT

EE

ES

LV

CY

EL

SK SI

EU

27

BE

RO IE FR IT

MT

LU

DK

SE

UK

LT

HU FI

IS

NO

Not prohibited (correct) Prohibited (not correct) DK/NA

Not prohibited: Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement



Unsurprisingly, retailers engaged in distance selling – in their own country or across borders – were

somewhat more likely to correctly state the length of the “cooling-off” period for distance sales (24%

and 26% vs. 20% for those not engaged in distance selling and 23% for those who only made domestic

sales). Respondents from such companies were also more likely to know that it is prohibited to include

an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material (50% and 52% vs. 44% for

those not engaged in distance selling and 47% for those who only sell domestically).

However, retailers who do not engage in distance selling or who only sell products in their own

country were the most likely to correctly state the exact period in which consumers have the right to

return a defective product (32% and 28% respectively vs. 24% for those engaged in distance selling

and 22% for those engaged in cross-border distance selling).

In terms of company size, only small differences were seen in terms of knowledge about the “cooling-

off” period for distance sales and about the period in which consumers have the right to return a

defective product; however, somewhat larger differences were observed for knowledge about the

prohibited practices. For each of the practices listed in the survey, respondents in larger companies

were somewhat more likely to answer that this practice was prohibited – independently of whether this

practice was prohibited or not. For example, 58% of respondents in large companies (with at least 250

employees) knew that it is prohibited to advertise products at a very low price compared to other


page 31

offers without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale – which is indeed prohibited – but

62% thought that it was prohibited to make exaggerated statements in advertisements – which is, in

fact, not prohibited. The corresponding proportions for respondents in small companies (between 10

and 49 employees) were 52% and 59% respectively.

Respondents who felt at least well informed about consumer legislation and those who abide by a code

of conduct related to consumer or commercial issues were more likely to correctly state the exact

period in which consumers have the right to return a defective product, and they were also more likely

to answer that the illegal practices listed in the survey were indeed prohibited in their country.

However, respondents who felt informed were not necessarily the most likely to correctly answer the

question about the “cooling-off” period for distance sales; in fact, they were most likely to

overestimate the length of the “cooling-off” period in force in their country (25% for “fully informed”

and 28% for those who agreed to adhere to a code of conduct vs. 23% for “less than well informed”

and 20% for those who had not signed up to a code of conduct).

For more details, see annex tables 17c and 18c and annex tables 19b through 22b.

3.3 Specific knowledge of product safety legislation

Occurrence of unsafe products

Almost 8 in 10 retailers in the EU thought that not more than a small number of non-food products

currently on the market in their country were unsafe: 19% answered that essentially all such products

were safe and 55% answered that a small number of products were unsafe. Less than a fifth (16%) of

retailers answered that a significant number of non-food products marketed in their country were

unsafe.

Although the proportion of retailers who answered that essentially all non-food products currently on

the market in their country were safe was lower in 2009 than in 2008 (18% vs. 25% in Flash EB 224),

the proportion of retailers who thought that a significant number of such products were unsafe

remained unchanged (16% in both surveys).

Estimated number of (un)safe non-food products, 2008-2009

25

55

16

4

Essentially all products are safe

A small number of products are unsafe, or

A significant number of products are unsafe?

DK/NA

A25(2009)/Q20(2008). Thinking about all non-food products currently on the market in your country, do you think that...?


18

61

16

5

Fl224 (2008) Fl278 (2009)


page 32

In almost all countries (28 out of 29), the dominant view among retailers was that not more than a

small number of non-food products currently on the market in their country were unsafe. The

proportion of retailers who thought that essentially all non-food products marketed in their country

were safe or that only a small number of such products were unsafe ranged from 47% in Romania to

99% in Finland. Estonia, Sweden, Norway and Iceland joined Finland at the higher end of the scale –

with between 90% and 95% of retailers sharing this opinion.

Respondents in Romania, Greece and Bulgaria stood out: 47% of retailers in Romania, 38% in Greece

and 36% in Bulgaria thought that a significant number of non-food products currently on the market in

their respective countries were unsafe.

41

2516

23 19 18 22

43

2

39

15 2129

2111

18 12 13 12 1121

12 416

8 3 7 5

2916

58

6775 65 69 70 66

44

84

46

69 6153

6069

61 66 65 66 6654

6471

5463

52 4942

66

74

5 6 6 8 5 5 11 115 7 14 11 17 15 16 14 19

13 14 22 17 17 21 27

36 3847

55

4 3 6 4 7 7 3 310 9 5 8 2 6 5 8 2

10 93 7 8 9

38 6 6 1 5

0

20

40

60

80

100

FI

EE

SE IE AT

NL

UK

LU SI

BE

MT

PT

DK

ES

PL

EU

27

LT

DE

HU

SK

FR

CZ

LV IT CY

BG

EL

RO

NO IC

Essentially all products are safe A small number of products are unsafe

A significant number of products are unsafe DK/NA

Estimated number of (un)safe non-food products

A25. Thinking about all non-food products currently on the market in your country, do you think that...?Base: all retailers, % by country


page 33

Legislation on product safety

A large majority of retailers correctly identified the following statements as being true:

Retailers should disclose contact details of producers/importers of unsafe products to the

authorities (84%),

Upon the authorities‟ request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks posed

by products which they supplied (81%), and

Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe product they are selling (77%).

A large majority (86%) of interviewees, however, also assumed that retailers must immediately recall

unsafe products from their customers – although they are not obliged to do this10

. Only 7% of retailers

correctly knew that unsafe products do legally need to be immediately recalled from customers.

Knowledge about product safety

84

81

77

86

7

8

14

7

9

11

9

7

Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers / importers of unsafe products

Upon the authorities' request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks

posed by products which they supplied

Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products they are selling

Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers

Correct Not correct DK/NATrue:

False:

Respondents‟ answers:

A9. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not?


A majority of retailers in all countries in this study knew that, upon the authorities‟ request,

retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks posed by products which they

supplied: the proportion of correct answers ranged from 54% in Poland to 99% in Portugal.

Respondents in Poland, Germany and Austria most frequently answered this question incorrectly

(25%, 21% and 16% respectively), while those in Sweden and Bulgaria were the most likely to say

that they did not know whether this statement was correct or not (both 24%).

99 93 91 90 90 89 88 87 87 86 86 84 84 83 83 83 82 81 80 76 74 73 71 69 67 66 6454

7972

1 2 4 2 3 4 5 1 5 5 6 8 7 8 9 4 8 10 136 9

5 11 921

1625

714

16 7 7 8 8 8 7 12 9 9 10 8 10 9 9 14 11 10 11

20 19 24 20 2413

20 2114 14

0

20

40

60

80

100

PT

MT

UK IE IT ES

FR

LV

HU

SK

NL

LU

EL SI

RO

EE

CY

EU

27

FI

BE

CZ

DK

BG

LT

SE

DE

AT

PL

NO IS

True (correct) False (not correct) DK/NA

True: Upon the authorities’ request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks posed by products which they supplied

A9. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not?Base: all retailers, % by country

10

In fact, recalls from customers are only used as a last resort measure.


page 34

Virtually all respondents in Portugal also answered correctly that retailers must immediately notify

authorities about any unsafe products they are selling. In 11 other countries, about 9 in 10 retailers

answered this question correctly (e.g. 91% in Spain and 89% in Luxembourg), while the proportion of

correct answers dropped below 50% in only two countries: Austria (47%) and Germany (48%).

However, while 38% of German retailers answered that retailers were not obliged to immediately

notify the authorities, this proportion was lower for Austrian retailers (29%) – the latter were more

likely to give a “don‟t know” response (23% vs. 13% in Germany).

10093 91 91 91 90 90 90 90 89 89 89 86 86 84 83 80 79 78 77 76 75 71 69 64 63

48 47

83 77

3 2 4 3 5 5 6 6 4 3 51

8 94 11 13 11 14

313 19

16 2413 38

29

910

4 6 6 7 5 6 5 4 7 8 613

6 713 9 8 11 9

2212 10 15 12

2413

23

8 13

0

20

40

60

80

100

PT

EE

ES

MT IT FI

SK

FR

UK SI

LU IE CY

EL

LV

HU CZ

DK

LT

EU

27

BG

RO PL

NL

BE

SE

DE

AT

NO IS


True: Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products they are selling


Similarities could also be seen when looking at retailers‟ responses to the statement that retailers

should disclose the contact details of producers or importers of unsafe products to the

authorities. More than 7 in 10 retailers in almost all countries in this study correctly answered that

this statement is true (ranging from 72% in the Netherlands to 95% in Portugal). Interviewees in

Austria and Sweden were – once again – the least likely to answer this question correctly (67% and

65% respectively). However, this time they were joined by retailers in Bulgaria (67%), where 31% of

interviewees did not know whether this statement was correct or not.

95 91 90 90 89 89 88 88 88 87 87 86 85 85 85 85 84 83 82 80 80 79 76 76 72 67 67 65

83 78

43 5 5 3 2 6 4 7 4 2 6 5 4 3 6 7 4 8 9 11 7 13

7 12

212

10

69

6 5 6 8 9 7 8 5 9 12 8 10 11 13 10 9 13 10 10 9 14 1117 16

3121 25

12 13

0

20

40

60

80

100

PT

MT IE UK

ES IT FI

LU

FR

SK

HU

EE

CZ

LV SI

EL

EU

27

CY

RO PL

DE

DK

BE

LT

NL

BG

AT

SE

NO IS


True: Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers / importers of unsafe products



page 35

Similar to the results for retailers‟ knowledge about prohibited commercial practices (see previous

section), a large proportion of managers were not able to distinguish between true and false statements

about product safety: at least two-thirds of interviewees across all countries thought that retailers

must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers, although this is in fact not true.

The proportion of retailers who correctly stated that they were not obliged to immediately recall

unsafe products from their customers ranged from virtually none in Cyprus and Portugal to more than

a fifth in Belgium (22%).

2216 15 12 11 8 8 7 7 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1

8 8

69

6677

6882 86 81 86 91 86 90 89

84 89 9182

91 93 90 91

71

93 96 92 95 94 10090

85 89

918

820

6 6 11 7 2 7 4 612 7 5

156 5 7 7

27

5 3 6 3 5 10 6 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

BE

AT

DE

SE

PL FI

NL

EU

27

UK

CZ

DK

LV

LT

EL

EE

HU IT RO

LU ES

BG SI

IE SK

FR

MT

PT

CY

NO IS

False (correct) True (not correct) DK/NA

False: Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers



There were mostly only small differences across company types when looking at specific knowledge

of product safety legislation. For example, across almost all types of companies at least 80% of

retailers knew that they should disclose the contact details of producers/importers of unsafe products

to the authorities and at least 75% knew that they must immediately notify the authorities about any

unsafe product they were selling.

For more details, see annex tables 23b through 26b and annex table 67b.


page 36

3.4 Finding information about consumer legislation

A large majority (78%) of retailers

answered that they knew where to find

relevant information or ask for

advice about consumer legislation in

force in their country, and 22% knew

where to look for information or advice

about consumer legislation in force in

other EU countries. A minority (1%)

spontaneously said that they would go

to the European Consumer Centre to

get such information.

Only one in six (17%) respondents said

they did not know where to find

relevant information or advice about

consumer legislation in force in their

own country or other Member States.

In 2008 (Flash EB 224), one in three retailers said that they knew where to find information about

consumer legislation in other EU countries – however, caution should be exercised when comparing

this number with the current result as the format of the question and its wording differed between the

two surveys11

.

The proportion of retailers who admitted not knowing where they could find relevant information or

advice about consumer legislation ranged from 2% in Slovakia and 5% in Bulgaria to approximately a

quarter in the UK, Cyprus, France, Greece and Denmark (between 23% and 25%). In Norway and

Iceland, roughly a quarter of retailers did not know where to look for information about this topic

(24% and 28% respectively).

25 25 24 24 23 20 2017 17 17 16 16 16 15 15 15 14 14 14 13 13 13

9 9 8 7 52

2824

0

20

40

60

DK

EL

FR

CY

UK

MT

LU

EU

27

ES

CZ

NL IE

HU

BE

DE

RO PL

LT SI

IT SE FI

LV

AT

EE

PT

BG

SK IS

NO

Do retailers know where to look for relevant information about consumer legislation?

No, neither for their own country nor for other EU countries

A4. Do you know where you can find or get relevant information and advice about consumer legislation either regarding your own country or other EU countries?

Base: all retailers, % of mentions by country

11

In the 2008 survey (Flash EB 224), retailers were asked whether they knew where to find relevant information

about regulation on consumer protection in other EU countries, while retailers in the current survey were asked

whether they knew where to find or get relevant information and advice about consumer legislation either

regarding your own country or other EU countries.


78

22

1

17

2

Yes, with regard to legislation in their own country

Yes, with regard to legislation in other EU countries

Yes, mentioned the European Consumer Centre specifically

No, neither for their own country nor for other EU countries

DK/NA

A4. Do you know where you can find or get relevant information and advice about consumer legislation either

regarding your own country or other EU countries?Base: all retailers, % of mentions EU27


page 37

More than 6 in 10 retailers in all countries in this study answered that they knew where to find relevant

information or ask for advice about consumer legislation in place in their country; this proportion

ranged from 64% in Belgium and 65% in Malta to 90% in Austria and Portugal and 93% in Bulgaria.

In all countries surveyed, retailers were considerably less likely to answer that they knew where to

look for information or advice about consumer legislation in place in other EU countries. For example,

although Bulgarians were most likely to know where to find information about consumer legislation of

their own country, they were least likely to know where to find similar information for other Member

States (93% vs. 6%).

Respondents in Finland and Latvia most frequently said that they knew where to look for information

about consumer legislation in other EU countries (48%-49%); somewhat lower proportions were

found in Luxembourg and Malta (42% and 38% respectively).

93 90 90 89 89 89 86 85 84 84 82 82 81 78 78 78 77 76 75 75 75 73 73 73 73 73

65 6471 69

0

20

40

60

80

100

BG

PT

AT

EE

LV

SK

SE SI

FI

LT

DE IE PL

EU

27

NL

CZ IT UK

RO ES

HU

DK

LU

FR

EL

CY

MT

BE

NO IS


Yes, with regard to legislation in their own country



49 4842

38 37 34 34 3329 28 27 26 25 24 24 22 21 20 20 19 18 18 17 16

13 11 106

18 18

0

20

40

60

80

LV FI

LU

MT

EL

AT

UK IE LT

PT

CZ

EE SI

SK

PL

EU

27

DE

NL

RO

CY

HU

FR

DK

ES

SE IT BE

BG IS

NO

Yes, with regard to legislation in other EU countries



The proportion of retailers who spontaneously mentioned the European Consumer Centre as a source

of information on consumer legislation was lower than 5% in all countries surveyed (for more details,

see annex table 13a).


page 38

Four in 10 retailers also answered that they had actively searched for information or advice about

consumer legislation in the past two years (for example, by contacting consumer authorities in

writing or by phone, or by searching the Internet).

Looking only at respondents who had not looked for information on consumer legislation, the largest

proportion said this was because they had had no need for information (31%) and about a fifth (21%)

answered that the information they needed was already available.

A minority (3%) of retailers had not looked for information although such information would have

been useful to them and 1% did not know where to find information or ask for advice. Finally, 2%

stated other reasons for not having looked for information about consumer legislation.

Did retailers look for information or advice on consumer legislation in the past two years?

40

31

21

3

1

2

1

Yes

No, because they did not need this information

No, they already have this information, there was no need to search for it

No, although such information would be useful

No, because they don't know where to get this information

No, for other reasons

DK/NA

A5. In the past two years, have you actively searched for information or advice on consumer legislation?



page 39

More than half of retailers in Norway and Iceland (both 55%) had actively searched for information or

advice about consumer legislation in the past two years; a similar proportion was observed in Malta,

Bulgaria, Portugal, Slovakia and Romania (between 51% and 66%). Retailers in France and Belgium

were twice less likely to have looked for information about consumer legislation in the same period

(28% and 30% respectively).

Among the retailers who had not looked for information about consumer legislation, in a majority of

countries surveyed, the main reason given was that they had had no need for such information in the

past two years. Retailers in Slovenia and Finland were most likely to answer that they had had no need

for information on consumer legislation (46% and 45% respectively). In Ireland, Germany, Estonia,

France, the UK and Denmark, around 4 in 10 retailers selected this response (between 38% and 41%).

Respondents in Portugal and Italy were the most likely to say that the information they needed about

consumer legislation was already available to them (33% and 30% respectively). In Denmark and

Iceland, on the other hand, less than a tenth of retailers shared this opinion (9% and 8% respectively).

10 8 9

2717

23 1931

38 35

17

3441

13

4131

24 2839 36

26

3946

24

4537

19

41

27 3113 21

33

16

18

18 2717

13 15

30

179

29

1121

17

26

17 23

24

2017

28

2025

25

27

12 8

1

2

4 12 2

21

1 13

1 1

4

4 2

2 2

1 4

1

2

1 2

5

6

1 38

54 2 1

23 2 7

2 3

6

2 17

41

4

2

6

1

1 2

4

4

1 43

1 1 5 51 5 4

24

11 3 6

2 16

11

1

3 2

0

20

40

60

80

RO

SK

PT

BG

MT

HU ES

EL IE SE IT PL

DK

CY

UK

EU

27

CZ

LU

EE

AT

LT

DE SI

NL FI

LV

BE

FR

NO IS

No, because I did not need this information

No, I already have this information, there was no need to search for it

No, because I don't know where to get this information

No, although such information would be useful

No, for other reasons

Did retailers look for information or advice on consumer legislation in the past two years?

A5. In the past two years, have you actively searched for information or advice on consumer legislation (for example by contacting the consumer authorities in writing or by phone or by searcing on websites)?

Base: all retailers, % by country, „DK/NA‟ answers not shown

6658 53 52 51 48 48 46 46 45 45 44 43 43 42 40 40 40 37 36 35 35 35 34 33 33 30 28

55 55

0

20

40

60

80

RO

SK

PT

BG

MT

HU ES

EL IE SE IT PL

DK

CY

UK

EU

27

CZ

LU

EE

AT

LT

DE SI

NL FI

LV

BE

FR

NO IS

Yes


page 40


Respondents working in larger companies – in terms of the size of their workforce – were more likely

than their counterparts in small companies (with less than 50 employees) to state that they knew

where to find relevant information or ask for advice about consumer legislation in place in their

country and about such legislation in other EU countries. For example, 34% of interviewees working

in companies with at least 250 employees said that they knew where to look for information about

consumer legislation in other EU countries, compared to only 21% of interviewees in companies with

between 10 and 49 employees.

A similar pattern appeared when looking at the link between retailers‟ adherence to a code of conduct

and their perceived level of information about consumer legislation. For example, more than 8 in 10

retailers who agreed to abide by a code of conduct (84%) and a similar proportion of those who felt

fully informed about consumer legislation (86%) said that they knew where to look for information

about consumer legislation in force in their country; the corresponding proportions for those who did

not subscribe to a code of conduct and those who felt less than well informed were 76% and 57%

respectively.

Only small differences were observed when looking at differences in knowing where to find

information about legislation in one‟s own country in terms of other company characteristics – e.g.

having subsidiaries in another EU country or being engaged in distance selling. However, larger

differences were observed when comparing country results concerning retailers‟ knowledge of where

to look for information about consumer legislation in other EU countries. For example, 26% of

retailers who use distance sales channels knew where to look for information about consumer

legislation in force in other countries, while only half as many retailers who did not use such channels

said the same (13%).

Interviewees in larger retail companies (with at least 50 employees) or with subsidiaries or retail

outlets in other EU countries and retailers who agreed to abide by a code of conduct or who felt at

least well informed about consumer legislation were the most likely to have actively searched for

information or advice about consumer legislation in the past two years. For example, more than 4

in 10 interviewees who felt well informed (43%) or fully informed (50%) about consumer legislation

had searched for information or advice about such legislation, compared to only half as many

interviewees who felt less than well informed about this topic (20%). Furthermore, more than half

(55%) of the latter answered that they had needed no such information in the past two years.

For more details, see annex tables 13b and 14b.


page 41

4. Compliance with consumer and product safety legislation

In chapter 3, we look into retailers‟ compliance with consumer and product safety legislation. The first

section of this chapter examines their perceptions of compliance with consumer and product safety

legislation – for example, we take a look at the incidence of fraudulent advertisements or offers. The

second section looks at retailers‟ experiences with enforcement and market surveillance actions, while

the third section takes a closer look at retailers‟ views on the way several bodies ensure compliance

with consumer and product safety legislation.

4.1 Incidences of non-compliance

Compliance with consumer legislation

When asked whether they complied with all legislation dealing with the economic interests of

consumers, virtually all retailers declared that they did: 70% agreed strongly and 29% agreed.

Nonetheless, when asked whether their competitors always complied with this legislation, only 7 in 10

retailers thought so (27% agreed strongly and 43% agreed). About a tenth (9%) of retailers disagreed

with the statement and 21% said they did not know – or would not say – whether their competitors

complied with consumer legislation.


70

27

29

43 8 1 21

You comply with consumer legislation

Your competitors comply with consumer legislation

Strongly agree Agree Disagree Strongly disagree DK/NA

A15. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please say whether you strongly agree – agree – disagree – strongly

disagree with the following statements.Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 42

Similar to the EU-wide results, virtually all retailers in all countries surveyed answered that they

complied with legislation dealing with the economic interest of consumers. The proportion of

“strongly agree” responses, nevertheless, did show some variation across countries. While more than

three-quarters of retailers in Germany (78%), Sweden (79%), Spain (80%), Norway (83%), Austria

(84%) and Finland (86%) strongly agreed that they respected consumer legislation, this proportion

was less than half in the Netherlands (38%), Latvia (42%) and Romania (48%).

97100 100 99 100 99 99 100 99

96 98 99 99 98 99 99 10096 99 98 97 97

100 98 97 96100 99 100 98

86

84

80

79

78

74

73

73

72

71

71

70

70

70

66

64

63

60

59

59

59

58

58

56

55

48

42

38

82

53

0

20

40

60

80

100

FI

AT

ES

SE

DE

UK

HU

PT

FR

CZ IE

EU

27

EE

EL

LU

CY IT BE SI

DK

BG

LT

SK

MT

PL

RO

LV

NL

NO IS

Sum of 'Strongly agree' and 'Agree' Strongly agree

Compliance with consumer legislation – respondents

A15. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please say whether you strongly agree – agree – disagree – strongly disagree with the following statements.


Retailers in Bulgaria were by far the least likely to agree that that their competitors complied with

legislation dealing with the economic interest of consumers (30% in total agreed and 8% strongly

agreed). In all other countries, at least half of retailers thought that their competitors acted in

accordance with consumer legislation, with respondents in Belgium and Finland leading the way in

this view (86% and 88% respectively).

Retailers in Finland were also most likely to strongly agree that their competitors complied with

consumer legislation (57%); they were followed by retailers in France (46%) and Sweden (40%). In

sharp contrast, less than a tenth of retailers in Latvia, Poland, Bulgaria and Lithuania expressed their

strong agreement (between 6% and 9%).

Retailers in Bulgaria (see above), followed by those in Lithuania, Romania, Latvia and Cyprus

(between 51% and 55%), were the least likely to agree that their competitors complied with consumer

legislation, and were the most likely to say they could not – or would not – answer this question about

their competitors (for more details, see annex table 33a).

88 8682 79 78 77 77 77 75 73 71 70 68 67 65 65 63 63 63 60 60 59 58

55 54 53 51

30

82 80

57

38 4

6

33 35

15

33 4

0

34

24

19

27

13

22

12

21 25

21 3

2

16 8

22

16 12 6 12 9 8 18

33

0

20

40

60

80

100

FI

BE

FR IE AT

NL

LU SE

UK

DE

DK

EU

27 SI

EE

SK

MT

ES

EL

CZ IT PL

HU

PT

CY

LV

RO LT

BG IS

NO

Sum of 'Strongly agree' and 'Agree' Strongly agree

Compliance with consumer legislation – competitors of respondents

A15. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please say whether you strongly agree – agree – disagree – strongly disagree with the following statements.



page 43

Fraudulent advertisements or offers12

Almost 8 in 10 (77%) retailers had

not come across fraudulent

advertisements or offers made by

their competitors in the past 12

months. Slightly less than a tenth

(8%) had once or twice come

across such advertisements or

offers in the past 12 months, while

12% said that this had occurred on

several occasions during that

period.

More than 4 in 10 retailers in

Greece and Lithuania answered

that they had come across at least

one fraudulent advertisement or

offer made by competitors in the

past 12 months – respectively 29% and 34% of these retailers had come across several such

advertisements.

The eight countries at the bottom of the distribution are all “old” Member States – they were part of

the EU before the 2004 enlargement. In these countries, not more than a fifth of interviewees had

come across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months (between

10% and 20%).

34 2922

1422

818 16 18 13

22 23 18 17 16 13 13 9 12 12 13 9 8 8 8 7 5 516 18

1215

1819

1125

13 14 12 167 6 10 10 6 8 9 12 9 8 7

7 8 7 6 5 5 5

16 6

46 52 5763 64 65 67 67 66 67 62 68

5971 77

7178 77 75 77 79 82 83 83 84 84 88 89

6875

0

20

40

60

80

100

LT

EL

CY SI

RO

MT

PL

SK

CZ

PT

BG

EE

HU ES

DK

LV FI

BE IT

EU

27

DE

SE

LU IE AT

NL

UK

FR IS

NO

Yes, on several occasions Yes, once or twice No DK/NA

Retailers who came across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months

A10. In the past twelve months, have you come across fraudulent advertisements, statements or offers made by your competitors?


12

Fraudulent advertisements or offers attempt to obtain money without selling anything.

Retailers who came across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months

12

8

77

3

Yes, on several occasions

Yes, once or twice

No

DK/NA

A10. In the past twelve months, have you come across fraudulent advertisements, statements or offers made by your competitors?



page 44

Misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers13

A large majority (70%) of retailers had

also not come across misleading or

deceptive advertisements, statements

or offers made by competitors in the

past 12 months. Slightly more than a

tenth (12%) said they had once or

twice come across such advertisements

or offers in the past 12 months, and

16% said that they had seen several of

these during that period.

Some similarities could be seen – with

the same countries appearing at the

higher or lower ends of the distribution

– when the results for misleading or

deceptive advertisements were

compared to those for fraudulent

advertisements. For example, retailers

in Greece, Lithuania and Slovenia were the most likely to have come across misleading or deceptive

advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months (56%, 51% and 50% respectively)

and retailers in France and Luxembourg were among the least likely to report having seen such

advertisements (12% and 17% respectively).

Nevertheless, in almost all countries in this study, the proportion of retailers saying that they had come

across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months

was higher than the proportion saying the same about fraudulent advertisements or offers.

37 32 28 24 23 26 2615 16

25 2516 18 14 19 17 16 20 16 14 14 12 14 12 8 11 8 5

26 25

1919

2219 20 16 16

25 2314 12

21 1919 12 13 13 9 12 14 12 14 11 11

14 109

7

31

10

4242 49

53 52 56 51 59 58 59 59 62 59 65 69 68 70 71 71 69 73 73 73 76 78 76 83 87

43

64

0

20

40

60

80

100

EL

LT SI

HU CZ

EE

BG

PT

CY

PL

RO

MT

SK

SE

ES IT

EU

27

DK

DE

AT FI

IE NL

UK

BE

LV

LU

FR IS

NO


Retailers who came across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months

A11. In the past twelve months, have you come across misleading or deceptive advertisements, statements or offers made by your competitors?


13

Misleading advertisements or offers contain false information or present factually correct information in a

misleading manner.

Retailers who came across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months

16

13

70

2


Yes, once or twice

No

DK/NA

A11. In the past twelve months, have you come across misleading or deceptive advertisements, statements or

offers made by your competitors?Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 45

Unduly coercing or pressurising consumers

Only slightly more than a tenth of

retailers were aware that

competitors tried to unduly coerce

or pressurise consumers in the past

12 months: 6% of interviewees

answered that this had occurred

once or twice during that period

and 7% said that it had occurred

more regularly – i.e. at least on

several occasions. A large majority

(81%) was not aware of such

practices initiated by competitors.

Finally, 6% of interviewees could

not – or would not – answer this

question.

The proportion of retailers who

were aware that their competitors had tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers in the past 12

months ranged from less than a tenth in Latvia, Finland, the UK and Sweden (between 5% and 9%) to

roughly a quarter in Greece and Poland (25%-26%).

Nevertheless, in only six countries did more than a tenth of retailers answer that they had seen their

competitors try to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers on several occasions in the past 12 months:

Lithuania (11%), Norway (12%), Luxembourg, Slovenia, Greece (14% each) and Poland (17%).

17 14 14 148 9 5 11 9 8 8 6 7 8 6 3 8 8 4 7 6 7 5 4 5 4 3 1

9 12

9 11 9 511 8 12 6 8 8 8 10 9 6 9 11 5 6 9 6 6 4 5 6 4 5 5 4

13 6

6758

73 79 76 77 7971 78 80 76 79

7369

77 79 8175 74

82 81 86 87 83 86 87 9286

76 78

716

4 2 5 6 412

6 4 8 411

179 7 5

12 136 7 3 4 8 6 4 1

92 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

PL

EL SI

LU

BE

EE

PT

LT

NL

DK

MT

AT

HU

BG

CZ

SK

FR

RO

CY

EU

27

ES

DE IE IT SE

UK FI

LV IS

NO


Awareness that competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers in the past 12months

A13. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressuriseconsumers to purchase something or sign up to a contract?


Awareness that competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers in the past 12 months

7

6

82

6


Yes, once or twice

No

DK/NA

A13. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers

to purchase something or sign up to a contract?Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 46

Unfair consumer contract terms

A large majority (79%) of EU

retailers was also not aware if their

competitors had used unfair

consumer contract terms in the past

12 months and only 13% thought

that their competitors had indeed

used such unfair contract terms

during that period (7% “on several

occasions” and 6% “once or

twice”). Seven percent gave a

“don‟t know” response.

Retailers in Poland were the most

likely to think that their competitors

had used unfair consumer contract

terms in the past 12 months: 12%

answered that this had occurred

once or twice during that period and 27% said that it had occurred on several occasions. Other

countries at the higher end of the scale were the Czech Republic (25% of retailers thought that their

competitor had used unfair contract terms in the past 12 months either once or twice or on several

occasions), Greece (26%) and Slovenia (31%).

In all other countries in this study, less than a quarter of respondents thought that their competitors had

used unfair consumer contract terms in the past 12 months – with retailers in Latvia, Ireland, Sweden,

the UK and Norway being the least likely to be aware of such practices (between 6% and 8%).

2716 15 10

17 11 10 13 178 9 4 7 7 9 7 9 8 7 6 5 4 6 4 3 3 3 2

10 5

12

15 1115

612 11 7 4

11 10 14 9 9 6 6 5 4 6 6 6 6 4 6 5 4 3 4

9

2

5563

55 62 66 6676

64 70 73 7466

78 82 80 79 8374

81 78 7973

86 8985 82

8984

7690

7 618 14 11 11

316

10 8 816

7 2 5 7 414

7 10 1017

4 17 11

5 115 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

PL SI

EL

CZ

LT

HU

AT

BG

EE

SK

PT

CY

BE

DK

NL

EU

27

DE

RO

LU IT ES

MT

FR FI

UK

SE IE LV IS

NO


Awareness that competitors used unfair consumer contract terms in the past 12 months

A14. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors used what you regard as unfair consumer contract terms?


Awareness that competitors used unfair consumer contract terms in the past 12 months

7

6

79

7


Yes, once or twice

No

DK/NA

A14. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors used what you regard as unfair consumer contract terms?



page 47

Knowingly selling unsafe products

Among retailers who sell

consumer products14

, only 7% said

they were aware that their

competitors had knowingly sold

unsafe products in the past 12

months and 6% said that they did

not know if this had occurred or

refused to answer. An

overwhelming majority (87%),

however, said that they were not

aware that their competitors had

knowingly sold unsafe products in

the past 12 months.

In a majority of the countries in

this study (16 out of 29), less than

a tenth of retailers who sell

consumer products stated that they were aware that their competitors had knowingly sold unsafe

products in the past 12 months. Retailers in Austria, Portugal, Cyprus, Romania and Greece were most

likely to answer that their competitors had knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months


10 10 10 5 105 5 7 6 2

9 4 4 4 3 3 5 2 2 3 2 2 3 1 2 2 1 17 7

11 8 812 7

8 7 4 5 81

3 3 3 4 4 1 4 3 3 3 2 1 3 1 1

6 4

65 65 6881 79

78 80

67

84 8779 81 87

80 84 8192

86 91 93 94 91 90 93 96 93 91 96

87 85

15 16 151 4

10 8

22

5 312 11

613 9 13

28 3 1 1 5 6 3 1 4 7 3 1 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

EL

RO

CY

PT

AT

BE

NL

BG

PL

LV

LT

HU

EU

27

IT ES

MT

DE

SK

LU

FR FI

EE

CZ IE DK

SE SI

UK IS

NO


Awareness that competitors knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months

A12. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors knowingly sold any unsafe products?Base: retailers who sell consumer products, % by country

14

Overall, 16% of retailers felt that this question was not relevant to them as they were not selling consumer

products (for more details, see annex table 29b).

Awareness that competitors knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months

4 3

87

6Yes, on several occasions

Yes, once or twice

No

DK/NA

A12. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors knowingly sold any unsafe products?

Base: retailers who sell consumer products, %EU27


page 48


Although virtually all respondents across all company types answered that they complied with all

legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, some groups of respondents were

more likely to strongly agree that this is the case:

interviewees in companies with at least 50 employees (76%-77% vs. 69% in companies with less

than 50 employees),

those who abided by a code of conduct or a code of practice related to consumer or commercial

issues (76% vs. 67%), and

those who felt informed about legal obligations towards consumers arising from consumer

legislation (80% of respondents who felt “fully informed” and 70% “well informed” vs. 58% of

those less than well informed).

The same groups of respondents were also more likely to strongly agree that their competitors always

complied with consumer legislation. For example, 23% of retailers who did not feel well informed

about consumer legislation strongly agreed that their competitors complied with legislation dealing

with the economic interest of consumers, compared to 33% of retailers who said they were fully

informed about such legislation.

Although retailers who felt informed about consumer legislation and those who abide by a code of

conduct related to consumer or commercial issues were more likely to agree that their competitors

complied with consumer legislation, they more frequently reported that they had seen breaches of

consumer or product safety legislation by their competitors in the past 12 months. For example,

only 26% of retailers who did not agree to abide by a code of conduct or code of practice said that they

came across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12

months, compared to 34% of retailers who abide by a code of conduct or code of practice.

For more details, see annex tables 27b through 33b.


page 49

4.2 Enforcement and market surveillance

Enforcement and market surveillance in the field of consumer legislation

Less than a sixth (16%) of retailers said that consumer authorities15

had contacted them in the past two

years in the framework of a general control concerning their national sales, and 13% mentioned such

contacts in the framework of a specific control16

. A similar proportion (12%) also thought that one of

their competitors had been subjected to a control by consumer authorities in the past two years –

however, it should be noted that more than half (52%) of respondents did not know whether the

authorities had contacted their competitors.

When asked about controls concerning cross-border sales, less than half of respondents provided an

answer – it was noted in chapter 1 that only a quarter of retailers were conducting cross-border

transactions. Only a minority (2%) answered that they had been contacted by consumer authorities in the

framework of a general or specific control concerning their cross-border sales.

Twenty-one percent of retailers had learned about a breach of consumer legislation in their market

through the media in the past two years. However, only 4% had been contacted by consumer

authorities (or consumer organisations) about a possible breach of consumer legislation by their own

company during that period and 6% said this had been the case for one of their competitors – note

again that 46% of retailers gave a “don‟t know” response.

Three percent of respondents reported having been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not

respecting the agreed code of conduct or code of practice in the past two years17

and 2% were contacted

by a European Consumer Centre (ECC) during that period concerning a specific consumer complaint.


16

13

12

21

4

6

3

2

2

2

69

72

36

68

83

48

86

78

58

57

15

15

52

12

13

46

11

20

40

41

You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your national sales

You were contacted by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations*) in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales

One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations*)

You have learned through the media about a breach of consumer legislation in your market

You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider you are breaching consumer legislation

One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider your competitors are breaching

consumer legislation

You have been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not respecting the agreed codes of conduct / codes of practice

You were contacted by the European Consumer Centre concerning a specific consumer complaint

You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your cross-border sales

You were contacted by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations*) in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales

Yes No DK/NA

A16. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years?Note: * consumer organisations were asked only in Austria and Germany because of their competences in enforcement


15

Consumer authorities are national, regional and local public authorities carrying out market surveillance

activities and other activities designed to ensure compliance with consumer and product safety legislation. 16

Specific controls are carried out as a consequence of complaints or suspicions related to a particular trader or

sector whereas general controls are carried out as part of the normal work plan of the enforcer. 17

Controlling for adherence to a code of conduct, this proportion increased to 4%.


page 50

Retailers in Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria were the most likely to answer that consumer authorities

had contacted them in the past two years in the framework of a control concerning their national sales:

49%, 48% and 37% respectively were contacted for a general control of their national sales and 29%,

49% and 36% respectively for a specific control. In Finland, Ireland, the UK, Germany and Sweden,

on the other hand, less than a tenth of retailers reported having been subjected to a general or specific

control by consumer authorities in the past two years.

49 4837 36 35 33

25 23 23 22 20 18 18 17 16 16 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 9 9 7 6 5

2616

39 4453 52 50

66

62 7064 69 74 75 81

72 72 6966

7971 72

84 81 79

63 63

83 8881

65 79

137 10 13 15

113

713 8 5 6

111 11 15 20

716 15

4 7 10

28 28

10 614 9 5

0

20

40

60

80

100

HU

RO

BG

BE

SK

EE

CZ

LV

ES

CY

MT

PL SI

FR

LT

EU

27

DK

EL

NL IT PT

AT

LU SE

DE

UK IE FI

IS

NO

Yes No DK/NA


A16. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years?Base: all retailers, % by country

4936

29 2923 22 20 20 18 16 16 14 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 11 11 10 9 9 5 5 4

15 14

44

5355 58 67 68

7766 72 79 82 79 77 72 74 72 74

81 8474 74

84

64 64

88 91 8785

79 78

7 11 16 13 10 103

15 10 6 3 7 10 15 13 15 136 4

14 156

27 28

7 5 915

6 8

0

20

40

60

80

100

RO

BG

SK

HU

CY

LT

EE

ES

FR

MT SI

EL

LU

EU

27

BE

DK

CZ

PL

PT

NL IT LV

SE

*DE

*AT IE UK FI

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

You were contacted by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations*) in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales

A16. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years?Note: * consumer organisations were asked only in AT and DE



page 51

Similar to the EU-wide results, many retailers in all countries surveyed found the question about their

competitors‟ contacts with consumer authorities difficult to answer: the proportion of “don‟t know”

responses ranged from 27% in the UK and Iceland to 74% in the Czech Republic. Nevertheless, some

similarities could be seen – with the same countries appearing at the higher or lower ends of the

distribution – when the results for competitors‟ contacts with consumer authorities were compared to

those for the respondents themselves.

30 25 24 23 22 20 19 18 15 15 14 13 13 13 12 12 12 11 10 10 10 9 9 8 8 8 7 518 17

19 35 40

2436

30

49

3326

37

20

56

34 29 28 2836 39

26 2534 33

17

5765

2338 38

55

31

5040 36

5343

50

32

4958

49

66

30

53 58 59 6052 50

63 6557 57

74

3427

7055 56

27

52

0

20

40

60

80

100

HU

DK

NL

RO

EE

EL

BE SI

SK

LT

BG FI

FR

*AT

CY

SE

EU

27

MT

PT

*DE

ES

PL

CZ IE UK

LV

LU IT IS

NO

Yes No DK/NA

One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations*)

A16. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years?Note: * consumer organisations were asked only in Austria and Germany because of their competences in enforcement


A considerable number of retailers in all countries in this study also did not answer the questions about

controls concerning cross-border sales – as noted earlier (see chapter 1), a majority of retailers did not

sell to consumers in other EU countries. Nevertheless, even after controlling for these “don‟t know”

responses, in almost all countries surveyed less than a tenth of respondents answered that they had been

contacted by consumer authorities in the past two years in the framework of a general or specific control

concerning their cross-border sales (for more details, see annex table 43a, 44a and 45a).

The proportion of retailers who had learned about a breach of consumer legislation in their market

through the media in the past two years ranged from 11% in Germany to 44% in Greece and Norway.

In Romania, Denmark and Estonia, about 4 in 10 retailers had heard about such a breach through the

media (between 38% and 41%).

44 41 40 38 33 29 28 28 27 25 25 24 24 23 23 22 22 21 21 21 20 19 18 16 16 14 12 11

4430

53 57 56 58 66

57 61 5769

5870 67

7564

74 71 76 7468 68 63

71 7875 74

6779

65

5367

3 2 3 5 114 11 16

416

5 91

133 6 2 5

12 1117

104 8 10

189

24

3 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

EL

EE

DK

RO SI

CZ

BE

BG IE SE

PL

LT

CY IT UK FI

MT

AT

EU

27

ES

HU

PT

LV

NL

FR

SK

LU

DE

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA




page 52

In only six countries did more than a tenth of retailers answer that their company had been suspected

of breaching consumer legislation in the past two years: Hungary (21%), Romania (15%), Belgium

and Estonia (14% each), Slovakia and the Czech Republic (11% each).

Country results for awareness that competitors had been informed by consumer authorities about their

non-compliance with consumer legislation showed again that a considerable number of retailers were

not able to answer questions about their competitors: the proportion of “don‟t know” responses ranged

18% in the UK to 69% in Portugal.

2115 14 14 11 11 8 7 7 7 7 6 5 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1

8 6

66 8068

82

6775 79 76

91 90 9388 90 88 86 83 83

91 8594

84 8394

8695 91

70

9588 93

135

18

4

2214 13 16

2 3 17 5 8 10 13 13

611

313 14

412

3 7

28

5 3 1

0

20

40

60

80

100

HU

RO

BE

EE

SK

CZ

LT

BG

CY SI

LV

DK

AT

PL

ES

NL

EU

27

MT

LU

EL

SE IT UK

FR

PT FI

DE IE NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider you are breaching consumer legislation


In almost all countries in this study, 6% or less retailers were contacted by a European Consumer

Centre concerning a specific consumer complaint in the past two years. In Norway and Belgium, on

the other hand, about a fifth of retailers said that they were contacted by an ECC (18% and 21%

respectively).

Similar to the results obtained for the EU overall, in almost all countries surveyed, only few retailers

reported having been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not respecting the agreed code of

conduct or code of practice in the past two years. In Romania and Belgium, on the other hand, roughly

a sixth of respondents answered that this had been the case (17% and 18% respectively).

18 175 5 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 1

72 80

81 7784 85 85 88 89 92

8698 97 94 95 89 94

8795 96 96

89

74

9198 94 94

8895 97

103

13 1810 10 10 8 8 5

111 4 4

10 512

3 3 311

25

92 6 6

123 1

0

20

40

60

80

100

BE

RO

HU

SK

CZ

BG

NL

ES

DK

EE

EU

27 SI

LV IE

MT

FR

CY IT UK

PL

PT

LU

DE

AT

EL

LT FI

SE

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA




page 53

Enforcement and market surveillance in the field of product safety

Almost 4 in 10 (38%) retailers who sell consumer products18

declared that they had carried out tests in

the past two years to make sure that any of the products they were selling were safe, while about 3 in

10 (29%) retailers said that the authorities had checked the safety of a product that they were selling.

Only 12% of retailers in the EU had received complaints from consumers about the safety of a product

they sold in the past two years. Furthermore, only a minority of retailers was asked by the authorities

to withdraw or recall one of their products (9%) or to issue a public warning about one of their

products (5%) in the past two years.

Retailers were told at the beginning of the current survey that product safety only related to consumer

products and did not include industrial or food products. In the 2008 survey (Flash EB 224), retailers did

not receive such guidance; as such, the results relating to product safety cannot be fully compared

between the two surveys.

In 2008, 45% of retailers had checked the safety of their products and 44% reported that they had been

checked by the authorities in the past 12 months. As in the current survey, involvement in other

product-safety related actions was mentioned much more infrequently in 2008: 21% of retailers

indicated that some of the products they were selling had been recalled or withdrawn and 14% had

received customer complaints about the safety of a product that they had sold during the same period.

Enforcement and market surveillance in the field of product safety

38

29

12

9

5

7

60

68

87

90

94

85

2

3

1

1

1

8

You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the products you were selling were safe

The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling

You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold

The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling

The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the products you were selling

Other action

Yes No DK/NA

A17. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm in the past two years?Base: retailers who sell consumer products, %EU27

18

Overall, approximately a quarter of retailers felt that this question was not relevant to them (for more details,

see annex tables 47b through 52b).


page 54

Although 75% of retailers in Greece answered that they had carried out tests in the past two years to

make sure that any of the products they were selling were safe, in roughly half of the countries in

this study under a third of retailers had carried out such tests (e.g. 25% in Latvia, 30% in Bulgaria and

32% in Spain). Cyprus and Romania joined Greece at the higher end of the distribution with

respectively 70% and 57% of retailers who had checked the safety of their products.

7570

5747 46 46 45 43 40 40 38 37 36 36 35 35 33 32 32 32 32 30 30 30 29 28 27 25

51

32

21 29

3949 53 50 51 57

56 59 60 63 62 63 65 62 61 66 6354

67 69 66 64 69 71 72 74

46

66

0

20

40

60

80

100

EL

CY

RO

UK

LT

MT

PL

PT

NL IE

EU

27

FR

HU

DK

LU SI

SE

ES

CZ

BE

DE FI

BG

SK

AT

EE IT LV

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

You, as a retailer, carried out tests to make sure that any of the products you were selling were safe

A17. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm in the past two years?Base: retailers who sell consumer products, % by country

The proportion of retailers who reported that the authorities had checked the safety of the products

they were selling in the past two years ranged from less than a fifth in Ireland, Iceland, Austria, the

UK, Slovenia and Estonia (between 12% and 18%) to almost half of retailers in Cyprus (46%) and a

majority in Bulgaria and Romania (57% and 61% respectively).

Romanian and Cypriot retailers were not only among the most likely to have carried out safety tests

themselves in the past two years (57% and 70% respectively – see above), they were also most

frequently subjected to a test by the authorities. In Bulgaria, on the other hand, only 30% of retailers

had carried out test themselves to make sure that any of the products they were selling were safe,

while almost twice as many reported being checked by the authorities (57%).

61 5746 42 41 39 37 34 34 32 31 30 29 29 29 26 25 25 24 21 21 20 20 18 18 17 16 12

37

14

37 4148 54 55 58 61 64 66

63 67 68 68 69 65 72 71 71 74 74 76 79 80 82 81 80 78 86

60

85

0

20

40

60

80

100

RO

BG

CY

BE

MT

FR

ES

DK

LV

NL

LU LT

EU

27

DE

SE IT EL

HU PL

SK

CZ FI

PT

EE SI

UK

AT IE NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling



page 55

In only two countries did more than a third of retailers answer that they had received complaints from

consumers in the past two years about the safety of a product they sold: Lithuania (44%) and

Belgium (34%). In Finland and Sweden, roughly a quarter of retailers had received consumer

complaints about product safety in the past two years (24% and 27% respectively), while in almost all

other countries in this study less than a fifth of retailers had received such complaints.

4434

27 24 21 18 17 17 15 14 13 13 12 12 12 12 11 11 10 10 8 8 8 8 7 5 4 3

19 17

5664

68 75 79 82 82 82 80 82 87 87 86 87 85 87 88 87 90 89 89 92 92 92 93 92 96 97

80 83

0

20

40

60

80

100

LT

BE

SE FI

RO IT EL

HU

NL

MT

ES

PT

CY

DK

CZ

EU

27

EE

AT

LV

PL

SK SI

BG

DE

FR

UK IE LU

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold



page 56

In all countries, except Belgium, not more than a fifth of retailers were asked by the authorities to

withdraw or recall one of their products in the past two years (ranging from 2% in Iceland to 20%

in the Netherlands) and not more than a tenth were asked to issue a public warning about one of

their products in the same period (ranging from 1% in Latvia, Slovenia, Portugal and Iceland to 10%

in France). In Belgium, on the other hand, 35% of retailers reported that they were asked to withdraw

or recall a product they were selling and 26% said that they were asked to issue a public warning about

the safety of a product they were selling.

35

20 15 14 14 13 12 11 11 10 9 9 9 9 9 8 7 7 7 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 82

61

76 85 8680 87 85 87 88 88 87 91 90 88 91 91 92 92 93 93 93 94 95 95 94 94 94 96 91

97

0

20

40

60

80

100

BE

NL

RO FI

SK

FR

SE

DK

CY

MT

CZ

HU

EU

27

BG

LT

DE

EL

EE SI

AT

UK

ES

IE PT

LU PL IT LV

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling


26

10 9 8 7 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 1

6890 86 89 88 95 93 94 94 95 95 95 96 95 94 96 95 95 95 93 97 96 97 98 98 99 99 96 96 99

0

20

40

60

80

100

BE

FR

SK

CZ

NL

EE IT

EU

27

EL IE DK

ES

HU

CY

SE FI

RO

UK

MT

BG

DE

AT

LT

LU PL

PT SI

LV

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the products you were selling



page 57



The larger – in terms of its workforce – the retailing company, the more likely it was to have been

subjected to a control by consumer authorities in the past two years. For example, one in five

respondents from companies with at least 250 employees said that consumer authorities had contacted

them in the past two years in the framework of a general control concerning their national sales,

compared to 17% of respondents in companies with between 50 and 249 employees and 16% in

companies with between 10 and 49 employees. Retailers with outlets or subsidiaries in other EU

Member States were also more likely to report having been controlled by consumer authorities.

Similar to the EU-wide results, a large proportion of retailers across all company types did not provide

an answer when asked about controls concerning cross-border sales. Nevertheless, even after

controlling for the proportion of “don‟t know” answers, no more than 1 in 20 retailers across all

company types answered that they had been contacted by consumer authorities in the framework of a

general or specific control concerning their cross-border sales.

In terms of having learned through the media about a breach of consumer legislation, the largest

differences were found when looking at retailers‟ self-perceived level of knowledge about consumer

legislation: 27% of respondents who felt fully informed about consumer legislation had learned

through the media about a breach of consumer legislation in their market in the past two years,

compared to only 14% of retailers who felt less than well informed.

Enforcement and market surveillance in the field of product safety19

Respondents in larger companies (at least 50 employees), with outlets or subsidiaries in other EU

Member States or currently active in distance sales were more likely to have carried out tests in the

past two years to make sure that any of the products they were selling were safe. Retailers who abide

by a specific code of conduct and those who feel informed about consumer legislation were also more

likely to report having conducted such tests. For example, 46% of retailers who said that they were

fully informed about consumer legislation had conducted tests to assess the safety of their products,

compared to only 31% of retailers who felt less than well informed.

Respondents in larger companies and those who felt informed about consumer legislation were also

more likely to report that the authorities had checked the safety of at least one of the products they

were selling.

In terms of having received consumer complaints about the safety of a product, the only meaningful

difference found concerned company size: respondents from larger companies (at least 250

employees) were more than twice as likely as those from small companies (between 10 and 49

employees) to have received consumer complaints in the past two years about the safety of a product

they sold (23% vs. 11%). We will discuss consumer complaints in more detail in the next chapter.


19

Note: this section excludes retailers who felt that this question was not relevant to them.


page 58

4.3 Perceived compliance monitoring with consumer and product safety

legislation

A large majority of retailers in the EU agreed that public authorities actively monitor and ensure

compliance with consumer legislation in their sector in their country (74% in total agreed, including

28% who agreed strongly). A similar picture emerged when retailers were asked about monitoring

compliance with product safety legislation: 76% in total agreed that public authorities in their country

monitor and ensure compliance with such legislation and 27% of retailers strongly agreed.

Slightly more than 6 in 10 (63%) retailers agreed that consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance

with consumer legislation in their sector in their country and the same proportion agreed that self-

regulatory bodies actively monitor the respect of codes of conduct or codes of practice in their sector

in their country. For each of these statements, a fifth of retailers strongly agreed; however, it should

also be noted that about fifth of respondents gave a “don‟t know” response.

Although almost two-thirds of retailers answered that the media regularly report on businesses which

do not respect consumer legislation (65% in total agreed and 21% agreed strongly), less than a fifth

said they had changed their commercial practices as a result of a media story (17% in total agreed and

3% agreed strongly).

Monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety legislation

27

28

21

20

20

3

49

46

44

43

43

14

11

14

21

13

14

37

3

4

5

4

4

38

10

8

9

19

20

8

The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in my sector in my country

The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country

The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation

The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of practice in my sector in my country

Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country

I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story


A18. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety legislation. Please say whether you strongly agree – agree – disagree – strongly disagree with the following statements.



page 59

A majority of interviewees in all countries in this study agreed that public authorities actively

monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in their sector in their country:

agreement ranged from slightly more than half in Greece (52%) and Poland (54%) to almost 90% in

Malta and Luxembourg (86% and 87% respectively). Furthermore, in only three countries did more

than 30% of retailers doubt that this was true: Greece (44% disagreed with the statement), Poland

(34%) and Lithuania (32%).

Although the overall level of agreement in Austria and Finland (81% each) was somewhat lower than

in Luxembourg or Malta, retailers in Austria and Finland were the most likely to strongly agree that

public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in their sector in

their country (52% and 46% respectively).

30 35

1930

23

5246

1829

22

38 33

1526

11

30 28 29 31

14

33 34

19 20 19 147

19

33

17

57 51

6552

59

2935

6350

56

4045

6250

64

45 46 45 43

58

39 36

51 44 3942

4733

44

55

8 8 1510 10 10 11 10 11 14 13 12 17

11 12 714 19

13 219 12

24

21 27 29 3024

1516

1 21

1 4 5 4 4 33 5

21

1 25

43

41

4 1

3

4 5 1 4 203 9

4 4 17 5 4 5 6 8 5 5 9 5

13 11 148 4 9 6

16 173

11 10 14 124 6 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

LU

MT

PT IE DK

AT FI

RO

BE IT FR

HU SI

SK

NL

UK

EU

27

ES

DE

LV

SE

CZ

CY

EE

LT

BG

PL

EL

NO IS


The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country




page 60

A majority of retailers in all surveyed countries also agreed that public authorities actively monitor

and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in their sector in their country – with the

same countries appearing at the higher or lower ends of the distribution as in the previous statement

about consumer legislation:

Respondents from Ireland, Luxembourg and Malta – once again – most frequently agreed that

public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in their

sector in their country (between 81% and 84%).

Bulgaria, Greece, Poland, Estonia and Lithuania could once more be found at the bottom of the

distribution with less than 6 in 10 retailers agreeing with this statement. Furthermore, Greek

respondents were – once again – most likely to express strong disagreement (17%).

3528 29

38

21 23 20 16 1525 30

48

2718

29 32 2714 17

3527

815

22

7

23 2310

32

18

4953 52

42

59 56 58 62 6353 48

29

5059

48 4549

61 5432

39

57 4235

49

32 30

41

42

47

8 7 9 9 12 13 8 12 148 11 6

15 186 9 11 7

22

8 11 1522 21 29

624 23

1320

11 2 5 1 1

43

14

5

3 1

3 2 43

4

6 4 2 63

2

2

17

1

2 5

7 10 8 6 7 8 10 7 9 138 12

5 514 13 10 15

4

19 19 18 14 1913

38

6

25

11 10

0

20

40

60

80

100

MT

LU IE FR IT BE

DK

RO SI

SK

DE

AT

ES

PT

UK

HU

EU

27

NL

CY FI

CZ

LV

LT

EE

PL

SE

EL

BG

NO IS


The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in my sector in my country




page 61

Looking at perceptions of consumer NGOs‟ monitoring of compliance with consumer legislation and

about self-regulatory bodies‟ monitoring of the respect of codes of conduct, similarities could again be

seen: for example, retailers in Ireland were found at the higher end of both distributions (80% and 81%

respectively agreed) and retailers in Bulgaria were found at the bottom (27% and 28% respectively).

It should, however, also be noted that many retailers found the questions about consumer NGOs and

self-regulatory bodies difficult to answer (i.e. the proportion of “don‟t know” responses was

particularly high at 20% and 19% respectively overall). More than third of retailers in Sweden (36%)

and Bulgaria (39%) could not – or would not – say whether they agreed or disagreed that consumer

NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in their sector in their country.

Similarly, more than a third of retailers in Austria, Lithuania, Estonia and Bulgaria (between 34% and

44%) gave a “don‟t know” response when asked whether self-regulatory bodies actively monitor the

respect of codes of conduct or codes of practice in their sector in their country.

2516

229

2334

21 25 26

12

31

1219 19 20 17

3323

14 189 12

2011 11

4 5 3

25

8

5559 53

6549

3749 45 43

56

38

55 47 46 43 4626

3641 36

43 3527

35 3539 37

24

38

45

710 10 8 6 14 18

12 1222

9 11 9 1714 13

11 8

29

17 18 239

24 25 31 39

33

1426

21

23

6 24 1

2

4 41

44 9

92

2

6 8 7

8

6 32

1

2

8 6

10 14 14 17 1910 9 14 18

819 18

2415 20 15

2231

1324 23 23

3626 27 24

18

39

15 15

0

20

40

60

80

100

IE PT IT NL

UK FI

BE

MT

LU SI

FR

DK

SK

ES

EU

27

EL

AT

CZ

CY

DE

RO

HU SE

LT

EE

PL

LV

BG

NO IS


Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country



2129 30 30

19 2112

3019

13 1018 20

35

918

33

1424

17 1525

5 413 8 10

4

36

10

6353 51 50

54 5159

3948

53 5547 43

28

5443

27

4333

36 3724

39 4030

26 2324

46

40

118 7 4

13 12 10 13 16 1221 17

13 13 11 10 722

15 17 159

29 28 24

24 2328

11

32

13

3 2 21 4 2

4

45

4 31

2 6

24 9

7

9

1 1 6

42 1

3

5

410 9 13 12 15 18 14 16 19

10 1319 21 25 27 26

20 25 21 2634

27 27 2738 42 44

513

0

20

40

60

80

100

PT

LU IE UK IT

MT

NL

FR

BE

RO SI

ES

EU

27

FI

DK

SK

SE

CY

CZ

EL

DE

AT

LV

PL

HU LT

EE

BG

NO IS


The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of practice in my sector in my country




page 62

Agreement with the statement that the media regularly report on businesses which do not respect

consumer legislation ranged from 40% in Poland to 84% in Denmark. In only three additional

countries did less than half of retailers agree that the media regularly covers such stories: Luxembourg

(43%), Spain and Lithuania (both 46%). Ireland and the UK joined Denmark at the higher end of the

scale with roughly 8 in 10 respondents who agreed with this statement (79% and 81% respectively).

Focusing on the likelihood of choosing one of the more extreme answer categories (i.e. strongly agree

or strongly disagree), it was noted that retailers in Norway, Sweden and the UK were the most likely

to strongly agree (between 31% and 36%), while retailers in Austria, Luxembourg and Malta most

frequently strongly disagreed – however, even in these countries only between 10% and 13% of

interviewees expressed such strong disagreement.

21

3629 28

11

34 2821

12

28

11

2921

15 1912 10 3

12 8 13 15 207 5

14 137

31

11

6345

5044

59

36 4148

57

39

56

3744

51 4449 50

5444 48 42 41 34

4641

32 3033

42

54

98 10

1225

921 21

14 16 2215 21 19 18 26 25

24 23 2722

2923 27

2837

3345

1826

5 56

7

7 4

19

510 5

23 4

1 56 13

9

8 48

912

44 4

7 7 7 105

153 7

167 7 9 9

16 1811 12

18 15 11 10 616 16 18

9 13 125 5

0

20

40

60

80

100

DK

UK IE

HU PT

SE

FR

DE

NL

EL SI

AT

EU

27

BG

SK

CY IT LV

BE

EE

MT FI

CZ

RO LT

ES

LU PL

NO IS


The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation




page 63

Although a majority of respondents across all countries agreed that the media regularly report on

businesses which do not respect consumer legislation (see above), only very few of them had changed

their commercial practices as a result of a media story20

. Retailers in Slovakia and Belgium were

the most likely to have changed their commercial practices following a media story (36% and 35%

respectively). In all other countries, however, less than 30% of interviewees agreed with this

statement. In seven countries, more than half of interviewees even strongly disagreed that they had

changed their commercial practices in this situation: for example, 69% of retailers in Austria, 66% in

France and 56% in Luxembourg expressed their strong disagreement.

16 155 2 5

123 2 5 7 8 4 2 2 3 3 2 5 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 2 5 3

20 20

24 26 2113

22 20 19 16 13 11 15 16 16 15 14 15 11 14 13 11 12 9 10 9 7 6

17 18

39 3840 41

3347

3750

45 40 4132

56 5442

2337

56

22

66

29 37

19

53

72

15

3847 20

38

1510 17 21

29

16 39 16 26 3426 44

618

31

5638

24

51

12

54 3766

24

17

69

5123 55

39

1018 14 9 13 13

111 8 5

145

2010 9

4 8 312 7 3

132

136 3

22

4 2

0

20

40

60

80

100

BE

SK

HU

DK

UK

CZ

PT

CY

RO ES IE EL

BG

NL

MT

LU

EU

27 SI

SE

PL FI

IT FR

EE

LV

AT

DE

LT

NO IS


I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story




Respondents in large retail companies, those who reported abiding by a code of conduct or code of

practice and those feeling informed about consumer legislation tended to agree more with each of the

statements about monitoring and ensuring compliance with consumer and product safety legislation.

For example, while 58% of retailers who did not feel well informed about consumer legislation agreed

that consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in their sector in their

country, this proportion increased to 68% for retailers who said to be fully informed about such

legislation.

There were mostly only small differences in the level of agreement with various statements about

monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety legislation when looking at other company

characteristics – such as having outlets or subsidiaries in other EU countries or engaging in cross-

border distance sales.


20

There appears to be only a weak association between media coverage on breaches of consumer legislation and

impact of such media stories on retailers‟ commercial practices.


page 64

5. Consumer complaints and dispute resolution

In this last chapter, we look at consumer complaints and methods to resolve such complaints or to

settle disputes. In the first section, a detailed analysis is presented of the main issues that consumers

complained about to retailers, while the second section looks at retailers‟ views about the proportion of

complaints that were resolved directly with the consumers – to their satisfaction.

In the second part of this chapter, the emphasis shifts to Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

mechanisms – we look at retailers‟ use of ADR mechanisms, their experiences when using such

mechanisms and preferences for such mechanisms compared to court proceedings to resolve a dispute

with a group of consumers.

5.1 Main issues of consumer complaints

When asked about the main issues that consumers complained about in the past 12 months, 55% of

retailers listed at least one issue – from this, we can assume that a slim majority of retailers received at

least one consumer complaint in the past 12 months.

Retailers from the Nordic countries (except Denmark) appeared to be the most likely to have received

consumer complaints in the past 12 months: 84% of retailers in Norway mentioned at least one type of

complaint, along with 77% of retailers in Sweden, 76% in Finland and 74% in Iceland. The

corresponding proportion for Denmark was considerably lower (50%).

Retailers in Estonia, Poland and Hungary, on the other hand, were the least likely to have received

complaints from consumers in the past 12 months: 37% of retailers in Estonia and 41% of retailers in

Poland and Hungary mentioned at least one type of complaint.

77 76

67 65 64 62 61 61 59 59 59 58 58 55 54 51 50 50 50 50 50 48 48 47 4541 41

37

84

74

0

20

40

60

80

100

SE FI

NL

BE

PT

ES

DE

SK SI

AT

BG IT

MT

EU

27

CZ

LU

LV

EL

DK

LT IE UK

RO

CY

FR

HU PL

EE

NO IS

Estimated proportion of retailers who received consumer complaints in the past 12 months

A19. What were the main issues consumers complained about in the past twelve months?Base: all retailers, % of mentions by country


page 65

According to the retailers surveyed, consumers most frequently complained about the price and the

quality of a product or service. Focusing solely on retailers who named at least one type of complaint,

slightly more than a third (36%) answered that one of the main issues that they had received

complaints about in the past 12 months was linked to price, tariff, invoices or bills and the same

proportion mentioned the quality of a product or service.

Problems with delivery, provision and installation and after sales or redress were each mentioned

by 16% of interviewees. Other issues listed in the survey, such as lack of clear information or issues

with contract terms or guarantees, were mentioned by less than 10% of retailers.

Main issues that consumers complained about in the past 12 months

36

36

16

16

6

5

3

3

3

2

2

16

Price, tariff, invoice or bill

Quality of the product (or service)

Delivery, provision, installation (including customer service)

After sales or redress

Lack of clear information

Contract terms or guarantees

Incidence related to unsafe products or services

Misleading advertisement, aggressive selling or fraudulent practices

Ethical or environmental aspects

Privacy issues

Difficulties in switching / changing provider

Others

A19. What were the main issues consumers complained about in the past twelve months?Base: retailers who named at least one issue, % of mentions, EU27

Individual country results showed that across almost all countries in this study, price and quality were

the most important issues that consumers complained about. Still focusing solely on retailers who

named at least one type of complaint, it appeared that quality of the product or service was most

often selected by retailers in Finland (61%) and Norway (59%). In the Netherlands and the UK,

roughly half of respondents mentioned this issue (49% and 52% respectively). Retailers in Cyprus,

Bulgaria and the Czech Republic, on the other hand, were among the least likely to have received

complaints about the quality of their products or services (24% each), but most unlikely of all to

receive such complaints were Romanians retailers (3%).

61

5249

45 45 43 42 42 39 39 38 37 36 34 33 33 33 32 31 30 30 28 27 27 24 24 24

3

59

40

0

20

40

60

80

100

FI

UK

NL

LU SE

LV

DK

LT

HU SI

PL

EL

EU

27

EE

DE IT PT

AT IE ES

MT

BE

FR

SK

CZ

BG

CY

RO

NO IS

Main issues of consumer complaints: quality of the product (or service)

A19. What were the main issues consumers complained about in the past twelve months?Base: retailers who named at least one issue, % of mentions by country


page 66

Complaints about price, tariff or invoice were most frequently mentioned by retailers in Italy (52%),

Latvia (50%) and Ireland (49%). In Hungary, Sweden and Poland, on the other hand, less than a

quarter of retailers reported that their consumers had complained about prices or bills (between 20%

and 23%).

52 50 4945 44 44 43 42 42 40 40 40 37 37 36 36 34 34 34 33 31 30 29 29 26 23 21 20

46

26

0

20

40

60

80

100

IT LV IE SK

BE

PT

MT

CZ FI

UK

NL

LU

AT

RO

EU

27

EE

DE

DK

CY

ES SI

EL

LT

BG

FR

PL

SE

HU IS

NO

Main issues of consumer complaints: price, tariff, invoice or bill


The proportions of retailers who mentioned complaints about after sales or redress were highest in

Portugal (38%), Iceland (35%) and the UK (32%); in all other countries in this study, however, less

than a quarter of respondents selected after sales or redress as one of the main issues that consumers

complained about in the past 12 months.

3832

2418 18 16 15 14 13 13 12 11 11 11 10 9 8 7 7 6 6 6 6 5 4 3 1 1

35

11

0

20

40

60

PT

UK

LU

MT

DE

EU

27

FR FI

PL

ES

DK

BE

NL IT AT

LT

CY SI

RO

LV

SK

BG

SE

EL

CZ

HU

EE IE IS

NO

Main issues of consumer complaints: after sales or redress


Complaints about the delivery, provision and installation of products were most often reported by

retailers in the UK (38%); they were followed by those in Finland (31%), Cyprus and the Netherlands

(both 24%). In Slovakia and the Czech Republic, on the other hand, less than 1 in 20 retailers had

received complaints about the delivery, provision and installation of products (2% and 4%

respectively).

3831

24 2417 16 16 15 14 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 9 8 7 7 6 4 2

2218

0

20

40

60

UK FI

CY

NL

EL

EU

27

RO

DE

EE

DK

AT

LU

BE

FR SI

IT PL

HU

PT

MT

ES

BG

SE

LT

LV IE CZ

SK IS

NO

Main issues of consumer complaints: delivery, provision, installation (including customer service)



page 67


As was noted in the previous chapter, large companies (at least 250 employees) were more likely to

have received complaints from consumers in the past 12 months: while only 55% of respondents in

small companies (less than 50 employees) listed at least one issue that consumers complained about in

the past 12 months, this proportion increased to 69% for respondents in companies with at least 250

employees.

Furthermore, respondents in larger companies in terms of workforce and those with subsidiaries or

outlets in other EU countries appeared to be more likely to mention each of type of complaint listed in

the survey. For example, while a quarter of all respondents in large companies (at least 250

employees) or in companies with outlets in other EU countries answered that their consumers had

complained about price, tariff or invoice, this proportion decreased to 19% for small companies (less

than 50 employees) and companies with no outlets in other EU Member States.

For more details, see annex tables 59b and 60b.

5.2 Complaints resolved directly with the consumers

According to almost two-thirds of retailers more than half of the complaints they had received during

the past 12 months were resolved directly with the consumer to their satisfaction.

More precisely, 43% of retailers said that all of their consumers‟ complaints were satisfactorily

resolved directly with the consumers, one-sixth estimated that the percentage of directly resolved

complaints was in the 81%-99% bracket and 1 in 20 retailers said that this percentage was between

51% and 80%.

Only 5% of retailers said that less than half of their consumers‟ complaints were resolved directly with

the consumer to their satisfaction, and 7% said that this was the case for none of the complaints they

had received in the past 12 months.

Percentage of satisfactorily resolved complaints

7

5

5

18

43

22 None

1-50%

51-80%

81-99%

100%

DK/NA

A20. What percentage of complaints you received in the past twelve months could you resolve directly with

the consumer to their satisfaction?Base: all retailers, %EU27


page 68

Slightly more than a fifth (22%) of respondents would not give an answer to this question or did not

know what to answer. The proportion of “don‟t know” responses ranged from 6% in Portugal to 57%

in Bulgaria. This proportion was also very high in Luxemburg (45%), Latvia (43%), Lithuania (38%),

Romania (36%), France (35%), Italy (34%) and Hungary (33% – for more details, see annex table

61a).

In the following chart, the average percentage of complaints that were directly – and satisfactorily –

resolved with the consumer is presented by country. Only the results given by retailers who provided

an answer were taken into account, i.e. interviewees who gave a “don‟t know” were excluded.

Retailers in Latvia and Finland reported the highest rate of directly and satisfactorily resolved

complaints (an average rate of 96% each). Slovakia, Denmark, Sweden, Germany, Luxemburg and the

UK followed with average rates of between 92% and 94%, figures similar to the situation in Norway

and Iceland (93% and 91% respectively).

Maltese respondents were the least likely to say that consumers‟ complaints were directly resolved

with the consumers to their satisfaction: the average rate of directly and satisfactorily resolved

complaints was only 54% in this country. Italy, Portugal, Cyprus and Spain were also found at the

bottom of the distribution with average rates of between 60% and 67%.

96

%

96

%

94

%

94

%

93

%

92

%

92

%

92

%

89

%

88

%

87

%

86

%

85

%

85

%

84

%

84

%

83

%

82

%

79

%

78

%

77

%

74

%

72

%

67

%

67

%

65

%

60

%

54

%

93

%

91%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

LV FI

SK

DK

SE

DE

LU

UK IE EE

AT

FR

NL

BG

BE

RO

EU

27

LT

EL

HU PL

CZ SI

ES

CY

PT IT

MT

NO IS

Average percentage of satisfactorily resolved complaints

A20. What percentage of complaints you received in the past twelve months could you resolve directly with the consumer to their satisfation?

Base: retailers who provided an answer (0-100%), % by country


Although almost no differences were seen across various types of companies in the proportion of

retailers who reported that less than half of their consumers‟ complaints were resolved directly with

the consumers to their satisfaction, certain types of respondents were more likely to report that all

complaints were satisfactorily resolved.

Only 31% of respondents from large companies (at least 250 employees) said that all complaints were

satisfactorily resolved directly with the consumers, while 44% of respondents from small companies

(between 10 and 49 employees) and 43% of respondents from medium-sized companies (between 50

and 249 employees) said the same. However, it was respondents in companies currently active in

cross-border sales that were the most likely to say that all complaints were satisfactorily resolved

directly with the consumers (49%).



page 69

5.3 Dispute resolution mechanisms

Use of ADR mechanisms to settle disputes with consumers

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms include arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen,

conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards and other out-of-court dispute resolution bodies. On

average, less than a tenth (8%) of retailers in the EU had used ADR mechanisms to settle disputes with

customers in the past two years.

ADR mechanisms were – by far – most frequently used in Norway (32%). In the EU, the proportion of

retailers who had used ADR mechanisms in the past two years to settle disputes with customers ranged

from less than 1 in 20 in Latvia and Sweden (3% each), Finland, Greece and Italy (4% each), to

around one in six in Denmark (19%) and Malta (15%).

19 15 11 10 10 10 10 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 7 7 7 6 5 4 4 4 3 3

32

6

7073 81 78 82 78

85 9078 84 83 87

6979 77 80

90 84 86 90 9084

7182

91 90 9386

64

89

10 12 8 11 8 125 1

148 9 6

2313 16 13

3 9 7 3 410

2314

4 5 311

5 4

0

20

40

60

80

100

DK

MT

BG

NL

CZ

EE

DE

ES

IE FR

EU

27

AT

BE

UK

SK

HU SI

LU CY

PT

PL

RO

LT IT FI

EL

LV

SE

NO IS

Yes No DK/NA

Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with customers

A21. In the past two years, have you used Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms (i.e. arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards, other out-of-court dispute

resolution bodies) to settle disputes with customers?Base: all retailers, % by country


page 70

The following chart shows that, among retailers who had not used ADR mechanisms in the past two

years, roughly the same numbers were aware or, alternatively, not aware of the existence of such

mechanisms (43% vs. 40%).

Among the retailers who had used ADR mechanisms in the past two years, only few reported having

used these mechanisms regularly (2% of all retailers, or about a quarter of those who had used ADR

mechanisms in the past two years).

In the survey in 2008 (Flash EB 224), retailers were asked whether they had ever used ADR

mechanisms, while retailers in the current survey were asked whether they had used such mechanisms

in the past two years. As a consequence, the results of the two surveys are difficult to compare (in

2008, 16% of retailers said they had had some experience of ADR mechanisms). Nonetheless,

respondents in both surveys had the opportunity to report that they regularly used ADR mechanisms,

and since it can be assumed that such a response would be influenced less by the reference period

specified in the question, it can be concluded that both surveys measured similarly low levels of ADR

usage (in 2009, 2% of retailers reported having regularly used ADR mechanisms, compared to 3% in

2008).

Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with customers

40

43

4

6

2

1

9

No, and I do not know any of those mechanisms

No, but I know some ADR mechanisms

No, but I am member of an ADR body

Yes, I have used ADR mechanisms

Yes, I regularly use those mechanisms

Yes, through the ADR body I am a member of

DK/NA

A21. In the past two years, have you used Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms (i.e. arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards, other out-of-

court dispute resolution bodies) to settle disputes with customers?Base: all retailers, % of mentions (multiple answers allowed), EU27

Total: 8% “Yes”

Total: 83% “No”


page 71

Focusing solely on respondents who said they had not used ADR mechanisms in the past two years, in

more than half of the countries in this study (16 out of 29), those who did not know any ADR

mechanism outnumbered those who knew about such mechanisms. For example, 60% of retailers in

Cyprus had not used any ADR mechanisms and also did not know such mechanisms, compared to

only 25% who had not used ADR mechanisms but who were familiar with them. Other countries

where more than half of respondents did not know any ADR mechanism were Luxembourg (51%),

Sweden (55%), Finland and France (both 59%).

In the other 13 countries, respondents were more likely to state that they had not used ADR

mechanisms although they knew some of these mechanisms – with retailers in Austria (67%), Ireland

and Portugal (both 59%) leading the way in this view. In Ireland and Austria, less than a quarter of

respondents answered that they did not know any ADR mechanisms, while the corresponding

proportion for Portugal was 32%.

60 59 5955

51 50 49 49 4945 45 45 44 42 40 38 37 36 35 32 32 32 30 29 27 25

2118

50

17

0

20

40

60

80

100

CY FI

FR

SE

LU PL

ES

RO

BE

CZ

SK IT LV

NL

EU

27

MT

EL

DK SI

PT

BG

DE

HU

EE

UK

LT

AT IE IS

NO

Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with customersNo, and I do not know any of those mechanisms


resolution bodies) to settle disputes with customers?Base: all retailers, % of mentions by country

67

59 59 57 56 5551 50 49 49 47 46 43 41 39 39 37 35 35 34 33 32 32

28 25 25 2517

41 39

0

20

40

60

80

100

AT IE PT

EL SI

DE

LV

HU

UK

BG

LT

EE

EU

27

ES

PL

CZ IT LU

RO

MT FI

SK

SE

NL

FR

CY

DK

BE

NO IS

Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with customersNo, but I know some ADR mechanisms


resolution bodies) to settle disputes with customers?Base: all retailers, % of mentions by country


page 72

Reasons for not using ADR mechanism

Retailers who had not used any ADR mechanisms were also asked for what reason they had not used

them. Nearly half (48%) of these retailers said that they would have been prepared to use ADR

mechanisms, but there simply had been no need to do so.

A tenth of retailers did not feel sufficiently informed about the ADR process to use such mechanisms

and a similar proportion (9%) said they had not used ADR mechanisms as they did not know these

were available in their country for their sector.

One in 20 respondents preferred to settle disputes in court instead of using an ADR mechanism. A

minority of respondents thought that ADR mechanisms were too time-consuming (4%) or too

expensive (3%), and only 2% said that they did not trust the ADR process. A similarly small number

(3%) said that had not used ADR as it was not available in their country for their sector.

Nearly 3 in 10 (28%) retailers reported “other” reasons for not using ADR mechanisms and about a

tenth (9%) gave a “don‟t know” response.

Reasons for not using ADR mechanisms

48

10

9

5

4

3

3

2

28

9

You would be prepared to use ADR but there has never been a need

You did not feel sufficiently informed about the ADR process

You did not know ADR was available in your country for your sector

You preferred to resolve the matter in court

ADR is too time consuming

ADR is too expensive

ADR is not available in your country for your sector

You did not trust the ADR process

Other

DK/NA

A22a. Why have you not used ADR?Base: retailers who did not use ADR in the past two years, % of mentions, EU27

In a majority of countries in this study, the largest proportion of retailers who had not used ADR

mechanisms in the past two years said this was because there had been no need to use them. Retailers

in Austria (83%), Ireland (77%), the UK and Germany (both 73%) were the most likely to say that

they had had no need for ADR mechanisms. In sharp contrast, in Malta, Belgium, Italy, Sweden,

Hungary and Slovakia, less than a fifth of retailers selected this answer (between 8% and 18%).

8377

73 73

59 58 55 5548

4540 40 40 39 36 36 34 32 29

25 24 2318 17 17 16

128

66

37

0

20

40

60

80

100

AT IE UK

DE FI

SI

EL

LV

EU

27

PL

CY

ES

FR

NL

BG

LT

EE

LU PT

RO

CZ

DK

SK

HU SE IT BE

MT IS

NO

Reason for not using ADR mechanisms: You would be prepared to use ADR but there has never been a need

A22a. Why have you not used ADR?

Base: retailers who did not use ADR in the past two years, % of mentions by country


page 73

Individual country results for other explanations to retailers‟ reluctance to use ADR mechanisms

showed that retailers in Ireland were more likely than their counterparts in other countries to consider

ADR mechanisms too expensive (13% vs. an EU average of 3%) or too time consuming (20% vs.

4%), while those in Portugal more frequently said they preferred to settle their disputes in court (16%

vs. an EU average of 5%).

For more details, see annex table 63a.

Successfully resolved disputes

Over three-quarters (76%) of retailers who had used ADR mechanisms in the past two years reported

that the outcome of their most recent ADR case was a successful settlement of the dispute.

Around 1 in 20 retailers stated that although the ADR took a decision in their most recent case, they

subsequently decided to go to court (4%), a similar proportion was taken to court by the consumer

following the ADR decision (5%), and a further 5% did not comply with the ADR decision but the

consumer decided not go to court (5%). A tenth of retailers gave no answer to this question or did not

know how to answer it.

Outcome of the most recent ADR case

76

4

5

5

10The dispute was settled

The ADR took a decision/opinion but you decided to go to court

The ADR took a decision/opinion but the consumer decided to go to court

The ADR took a decision/opinion but you did not comply and the consumer did not go to court

DK/NA

A22b. What was the outcome of your last ADR case?Base: retailers who used ADR in the past two years, % EU27

As the question about the outcome of the last ADR case was only presented to those respondents who

had used such mechanisms, the sample size per country was relatively small and caution is needed

when interpreting the results at individual country level. Nevertheless, in almost all countries, a

majority of retailers said that the outcome of their most recent ADR case was a successful settlement

of the dispute (for more details, see annex table 64a).


Large companies were more likely to have used ADR mechanisms over the past two years than

smaller ones: for example, 14% of companies with at least 250 employees had used these mechanisms

and 6% had used them regularly, while the corresponding proportion for small companies (with

between 10 and 49 employees) were 6% and 2% respectively. Similarly, retailers who agreed to abide

by a code of conduct and those feeling informed about their legal obligations towards consumers were

also more likely to have used ADR mechanisms in the past two years.

Looking at retailers‟ reasons for not having used ADR mechanisms, respondents from smaller

companies (with fewer than 250 employees) were more likely to answer that there had been no need to

use such mechanisms (between 48% and 50% depending on the size of the workforce vs. 41% of

companies with at least 250 employees). Respondents in large companies, on the other hand, more

frequently stated reasons such as not feeling sufficiently informed about the ADR process or

preferring to go to court to settle the dispute.


page 74

Similarly, slightly more than half of retailers using domestic or cross-border distance sales channels

said that there had been no need to use ADR mechanisms, compared to only 41% of retailers who do

not engage in distance sales and 46% of those who only sell their product domestically.

Unsurprisingly, retailers who did not feel well informed about consumer legislation were more likely

than well-informed retailers to answer that they had not used ADR mechanisms because they did not

know that such mechanisms were available in their country for their sector (15% vs. 7% for “fully

informed” retailers) or because they did not feel sufficiently informed about the ADR process (18%

vs. 8%).

Finally, across almost all types of companies, a large majority of retailers said that the outcome of

their most recent ADR case was a successful settlement of the dispute (between 73% and 87%).

For further details, see annex tables 62b, 63b and 64b.

Disputes taken to court

Less than a tenth of retailers in the EU said they had been taken to court to settle complaints with

consumers in the past two years. In most of these cases, retailers were taken to court by individual

consumers (6%), while the proportion of retailers who mentioned a collective court case was

negligible (0.5% of collective court cases initiated by a group of consumers and 0.2% by a

representative body, such as a consumer organisation or a national authority).

Have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers?

6 1

91

2Yes, by individual consumers

Yes, by a group of consumers as part of a collective court case

Yes, by a representative body (i.e. consumer organisation or national authority) as part of a collective court case

No

DK/NA

A23. In the past two years, have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers?

Base: all retailers, % EU27


page 75

The proportion of retailers who had been taken to court ranged from 1% in Finland to 18% in

Slovenia. Collective court cases were most common in Belgium and Portugal, where between 4% and

5% of retailers said they had been taken to court by a group of consumers or by a representative body

as part of a collective court case (for more details, see annex table 65a).

99 97 95 94 94 94 94 94 93 93 93 92 92 91 91 90 89 89 89 89 87 87 86 85 84 83 81 80

96 96

1 2 4 4 6 4 6 4 7 5 5 8 7 7 9 8 8 10 9 7 10 11 11 146 12 18

14

3 3

0

20

40

60

80

100

FI

UK

LV

RO ES

EL

PL

SE

EE IT BG

DK

CY

EU

27

HU IE LU

DE

FR

CZ

NL

AT

MT

PT

LT

SK SI

BE

NO IS

No Yes DK/NA

Have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers?

A23. In the past two years, have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers?Base: all retailers, % by country

Preference for dispute resolution mechanisms

In case of a dispute with a group

of consumers, about half of

retailers said they would prefer to

use ADR mechanisms to resolve

the issue: 35% mentioned

individual ADR and 13% selected

collective ADR.

Only a fifth of retailers would

prefer to go to court to settle a

dispute with a group of

consumers: 14% mentioned

individual court proceedings and

only half as many selected

collective court proceedings (6%).

Retailers appeared to prefer

individual ways to settle disputes over collective ones (35% “individual” vs. 13% “collective” for

ADR mechanisms and 14% vs. 6% for court proceedings).

Retailers prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through...

35

1314

6

33Individual ADR

Collective ADR

Individual court proceedings

Collective court proceedings

DK/NA

A24. Would you prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through ...?



page 76

One-third of respondents gave a “don‟t know” response – they could not say which method they

would prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers. The proportion of “don‟t know” responses

ranged from 15% in Hungary to 54% in Italy.

Focusing solely on respondents who expressed their preference for ADR mechanisms or court

proceedings, Hungarian, Estonian, Bulgarian and Norwegian retailers were the most likely to prefer

settling disputes with a group of consumers through individual or collective ADR mechanisms: 97% in

Hungary and 93% in Estonia, Bulgaria and Norway. However, while respondents in Estonia and

Hungary had a clear preference for individual ADR mechanisms (90% and 87% respectively), in

Norway and Bulgaria, a larger proportion preferred collective mechanisms (38% and 30%

respectively). Slovenia (30%), Sweden (35%) and Portugal (45%) share this higher preference for

collective ADR mechanisms.

Retailers in Italy, on the other hand, were the least likely to state that they would prefer to settle a

dispute with a group of consumers through an ADR mechanism (36%), while 39% of them would

prefer to reach a settlement through individual court proceedings and 26% through collective court

proceedings. In only one other country – Belgium – did respondents who would prefer to go to court

outnumber those who would prefer ADR mechanisms (51% vs. 49%).

75 70

52 51 50 48 46 46 45 44 44 42 40 39 36 35 35 34 33 31 30 30 28 25 23 20 208

44

30

9

2

1021 18

7 175

1810

2118

722

8 136

178 10 8 7 11

30

12 168

8

31

18

2

514

66

18 8

9

815

4 13

17

8

17 14

11

21

178 11

7

19

10

11 8 25

18

4

5

1 3 21 4

2

1

85 1

7

35

6 6

1

6

2

2 37

3

1

15

3

4

12

1

8

1523 21 21 25 23 27

39

22 26 3020

3427

33 33

47

22

4049 48 50

4133

39

5345

54

20

40

0

20

40

60

80

100

HU

EE

PL

AT

CZ

MT IE LT

EL

DK

BG

DE

RO SI

FR

EU

27

LV

ES

LU FI

UK

CY

SK

PT

NL

SE

BE IT

NO IS

Individual ADR Collective ADR Individual court proceedings Collective court proceedings DK/NA

Retailers prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers through...

Base: all retailers

A24. Would you prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through ...? Base: all retailers, % by country

90 8776

66 66 66 64 63 63 62 61 61 60 60 58 57 54 53 53 53 5246 44 43

37 37 35

18

55 50

3 10

8 2411 13

26 2330

1019

10 13 13 1623

13 11

3023 19

18 2235

20

45

14

18

38

29

6 2

158

20 187 11

6

2315

2513

20 22 1028

26

1116 20 31 27

16

18

16

44

39

5

8

1 2 2 3 3 3 3 1 5 4 413

7 5 104 9 7 8 8 4 8 7

25

2 7

26

213

0

20

40

60

80

100

EE

HU LT

CZ

LV

PL

AT IE BG

MT FI

RO

CY

DK

UK

EL

LU

FR SI

DE

EU

27

SK

ES

SE

NL

PT

BE IT

NO IS

Individual ADR Collective ADR Individual court proceedings Collective court proceedings

Base: retailers who expressed their preference

A24. Would you prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through ...? % by country


page 77


In terms of having been taken to court to settle complaints with consumers, the largest differences

were found when looking at company size: respondents from large companies (at least 250 employees)

were more than twice as likely as those from small companies (between 10 and 49 employees) to

answer that they had been taken to court in the past two years (17% vs. 6%). The corresponding

proportion for medium-sized companies was 10%.

Looking at preferences for ADR mechanisms over court proceedings, the largest difference appeared

between retailers who abided by a code of conduct related to consumer or commercial issues and those

who did not. A slim majority (53%) of the former group would prefer to use ADR mechanisms to

settle a dispute with a group of consumers, while 17% would prefer to go to court. The corresponding

proportions for the latter type of respondents were respectively 45% and 21%.

Finally, it should also be noted that large companies (at least 250 employees) were more likely than

smaller companies to prefer collective methods of settlement over individual ones: 16% of

respondents in large companies answered that they would prefer collective ADR mechanisms

compared to 12% of respondents in medium-sized companies and 13% in small companies.

For further details, see annex table 65b and 66b.

Flash EB Series #278

Business attitudes

towards enforcement and redress in the

internal market

Annex tables and

survey details

THE GALLUP ORGANISATION

Flash EB No 278 – Business attitudes towards enforcement and redress Annex

page 79

I. Annex tables

Table 1a. Size of the company – by country ....................................................................................... 85

Table 1b. Size of the company – by segments .................................................................................... 86

Table 2a. Turnover of the company in 2008 – by country ................................................................ 87

Table 2b. Turnover of the company in 2008 – by segments ............................................................. 88

Table 3a. Do companies have a legal service or a lawyer? – by country ......................................... 89

Table 3b. Do companies have a legal service or a lawyer? – by segments ...................................... 90

Table 4a. Companies‟ sales channels – by country ............................................................................ 91

Table 4b. Companies‟ sales channels – by segments ......................................................................... 92

Table 5a. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales – part 1 – by country ................... 93

Table 5b. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales – part 1 – by segments ................. 94

Table 6a. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales – part 2 – by country ................... 95

Table 6b. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales - part 2 – by segments ................. 96

Table 7a. Number of EU countries where companies have subsidiaries or retail outlets – by

country .................................................................................................................................................. 97

Table 7b. Number of EU countries where companies have subsidiaries or retail outlets – by

segments ................................................................................................................................................ 98

Table 8a. Number of EU countries to which companies offer cross-border sales to final

consumers – by country ....................................................................................................................... 99

Table 8b. Number of EU countries to which companies offer cross-border sales to final

consumers – by segments ................................................................................................................... 100

Table 9a. Number of EU countries where companies would make cross-border sales if laws

regulating transactions were the same in the EU – by country ...................................................... 101

Table 9b. Number of EU countries where companies would make cross-border sales if laws

regulating transactions were the same in the EU – by segments ................................................... 102

Table 10a. Self-perceived level of information about legal obligations towards consumers – by

country ................................................................................................................................................ 103

Table 10b. Self-perceived level of information about legal obligations towards consumers – by

segments .............................................................................................................................................. 104

Table 11a. Anticipated consumer awareness of their rights arising from consumer legislation –

by country ........................................................................................................................................... 105

Table 11b. Anticipated consumer awareness of their rights arising from consumer legislation ––

by segments ........................................................................................................................................ 106

Table 12a. Self-perceived level of information about legislation on product safety – by country107

Table 12b. Self-perceived level of information about legislation on product safety – by segments

............................................................................................................................................................. 108

Table 13a. Do retailers know where to look for relevant information about consumer legislation?

– by country ........................................................................................................................................ 109

Table 13b. Do retailers know where to look for relevant information about consumer legislation?

– by segments ...................................................................................................................................... 110

Table 14a. Did retailers look for information or advice on consumer legislation in the past two

years? – by country ............................................................................................................................ 111

Annex Flash EB No 278 – Business attitudes towards enforcement and redress

page 80

Table 14b. Did retailers look for information or advice on consumer legislation in the past two

years? – by segments .......................................................................................................................... 112

Table 15a. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – FR, PL,

CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, LV, PT, SE, MT, SI – by country ................................................................. 113

Table 15b. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – FR, PL,

CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, LV, PT, SE, MT, SI – by segments ............................................................... 114

Table 16a. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – AT, BE,

BG, ES, IE, LT, LU, NL, SK, UK, HU, EL, IT, RO – by country.................................................. 115

Table 16b. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – AT, BE,

BG, ES, IE, LT, LU, NL, SK, UK, HU, EL, IT, RO – by segments ............................................... 116

Table 17a. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – DE – by

country ................................................................................................................................................ 117

Table 17b. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – DE – by

segments .............................................................................................................................................. 118

Table 18a. Knowledge about the legal period to return a defective product – by country .......... 119

Table 18b. Knowledge about the legal period to return a defective product – by segments ....... 120

Table 19a. Prohibited: Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in

marketing material – by country ...................................................................................................... 121

Table 19b. Prohibited: Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in

marketing material – by segments .................................................................................................... 122

Table 20a. Prohibited: Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers

without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale – by country ...................................... 123

Table 20b. Prohibited: Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers

without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale – by segments .................................... 124

Table 21a. Not prohibited: Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement – by country . 125

Table 21b. Not prohibited: Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement – by segments

............................................................................................................................................................. 126

Table 22a. Prohibited: Describing a product as “free” although it is only freely available to

customers calling a premium rate phone number – by country .................................................... 127

Table 22b. Prohibited: Describing a product as “free” although it is only freely available to

customers calling a premium rate phone number – by segments .................................................. 128

Table 23a. True: Upon the authorities‟ request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to

prevent risks posed by products which they supplied – by country .............................................. 129

Table 23b. True: Upon the authorities‟ request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to

prevent risks posed by products which they supplied – by segments ............................................ 130

Table 24a. True: Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products

they are selling – by country .............................................................................................................. 131

Table 24b. True: Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products

they are selling – by segments ........................................................................................................... 132

Table 25a. False: Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers – by

country ................................................................................................................................................ 133

Table 25b. False: Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers – by

segments .............................................................................................................................................. 134

Table 26a. True: Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers /

importers of unsafe products – by country ...................................................................................... 135


page 81

Table 26b. True: Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers /

importers of unsafe products – by segments .................................................................................... 136

Table 27a. Retailers who came across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors

in the past 12 months – by country ................................................................................................... 137

Table 27b. Retailers who came across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors

in the past 12 months – by segments ................................................................................................. 138

Table 28a. Retailers who came across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by

competitors in the past 12 months – by country .............................................................................. 139

Table 28b. Retailers who came across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by

competitors in the past 12 months – by segments ............................................................................ 140

Table 29a. Awareness that competitors knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months –

by country ........................................................................................................................................... 141

Table 29b. Awareness that competitors knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months –

by segments ......................................................................................................................................... 142

Table 30a. Awareness that competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers in the

past 12 months – by country .............................................................................................................. 143

Table 30b. Awareness that competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers in the

past 12 months – by segments ........................................................................................................... 144

Table 31a. Awareness that competitors used unfair consumer contract terms in the past 12

months – by country ........................................................................................................................... 145

Table 31b. Awareness that competitors used unfair consumer contract terms in the past 12

months – by segments ........................................................................................................................ 146

Table 32a. Compliance with consumer legislation – respondents – by country ........................... 147

Table 32b. Compliance with consumer legislation – respondents – by segments ......................... 148

Table 33a. Compliance with consumer legislation – competitors of respondents – by country .. 149

Table 33b. Compliance with consumer legislation – competitors of respondents – by segments 150

Table 34a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general

control concerning your national sales – by country ....................................................................... 151

Table 34b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general

control concerning your national sales – by segments .................................................................... 152

Table 35a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control

concerning your national sales – by country .................................................................................... 153

Table 35b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control

concerning your national sales – by segments ................................................................................. 154

Table 36a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the

context of a specific control concerning your national sales – by country .................................... 155

Table 36b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the

context of a specific control concerning your national sales – by segments .................................. 156

Table 37a. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer

authorities – by country ..................................................................................................................... 157

Table 37b. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer

authorities – by segments ................................................................................................................... 158

Table 38a. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer

authorities or by consumer organisations – by country .................................................................. 159

Table 38b. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer

authorities or by consumer organisations – by segments ............................................................... 160


page 82

Table 39a. You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations)

that they consider you are breaching consumer legislation – by country ..................................... 161

Table 39b. You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations)

that they consider you are breaching consumer legislation – by segments .................................. 162

Table 40a. One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities (or by

consumer organisations) that they consider your competitors are breaching consumer legislation

– by country ........................................................................................................................................ 163

Table 40b. One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities (or by

consumer organisations) that they consider your competitors are breaching consumer legislation

– by segments ..................................................................................................................................... 164

Table 41a. You have been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not respecting the agreed

codes of conduct / codes of practice – by country ............................................................................ 165

Table 41b. You have been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not respecting the agreed

codes of conduct / codes of practice – by segments ......................................................................... 166

Table 42a. You have learned through the media about a breach of consumer legislation in your

market – by country ........................................................................................................................... 167

Table 42b. You have learned through the media about a breach of consumer legislation in your

market – by segments ........................................................................................................................ 168

Table 43a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general

control concerning your cross-border sales – by country ............................................................... 169

Table 43b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general

control concerning your cross-border sales – by segments............................................................ 170

Table 44a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control

concerning your cross-border sales – by country ............................................................................ 171

Table 44b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control

concerning your cross-border sales – by segments ......................................................................... 172

Table 45a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the

context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales – by country............................. 173

Table 45b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the

context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales – by segments ......................... 174

Table 46a. You were contacted by the European Consumer Centre concerning a specific

consumer complaint – by country ..................................................................................................... 175

Table 46b. You were contacted by the European Consumer Centre concerning a specific

consumer complaint – by segments.................................................................................................. 176

Table 47a. You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold –

by country ........................................................................................................................................... 177

Table 47b. You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold –

by segments ........................................................................................................................................ 178

Table 48a. The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling – by

country ................................................................................................................................................ 179

Table 48b. The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling – by

segments ............................................................................................................................................. 180

Table 49a. The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling

– by country ........................................................................................................................................ 181

Table 49b. The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling

– by segments ..................................................................................................................................... 182


page 83

Table 50a. The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the

products you were selling – by country ............................................................................................ 183

Table 50b. The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the

products you were selling – by segments ......................................................................................... 184

Table 51a. You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the products you

were selling were safe – by country ................................................................................................... 185

Table 51b. You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the products you

were selling were safe – by segments ............................................................................................... 186

Table 52a. Other events relating to producst safety– by country .................................................. 187

Table 52b. Other events relating to product safety – by segments ............................................... 188

Table 53a. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer

legislation in my sector in my country – by country ....................................................................... 189

Table 53b. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer

legislation in my sector in my country – by segments .................................................................... 190

Table 54a. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety

legislation in my sector in my country – by country ....................................................................... 191

Table 54b. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety

legislation in my sector in my country – by segments .................................................................... 192

Table 55a. Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector

in my country – by country................................................................................................................ 193

Table 55b. Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector

in my country – by segments ............................................................................................................ 194

Table 56a. The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of

practice in my sector in my country – by country ........................................................................... 195

Table 56b. The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of

practice in my sector in my country – by segments ........................................................................ 196

Table 57a. The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation –

by country ........................................................................................................................................... 197

Table 57b. The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation –

by segments ........................................................................................................................................ 198

Table 58. I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story – by country ............ 199

Table 58b. I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story – by segments ...... 200

Table 59a. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 1 – by

country ................................................................................................................................................ 201

Table 59b. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 1 – by

segments ............................................................................................................................................. 202

Table 60a. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 2 – by

country ................................................................................................................................................ 203

Table 60b. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 2 – by

segments ............................................................................................................................................. 204

Table 61a. Percentage of satisfactorily resolved complaints – by country .................................... 205

Table 61b. Percentage of satisfactorily resolved complaints – by segments ................................ 206

Table 62a. Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with

customers – by country ...................................................................................................................... 207


page 84

Table 62b. Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with

customers – by segments ................................................................................................................... 208

Table 63a. Reasons for not using ADR mechanisms – by country ................................................. 209

Table 63b. Reasons for not using ADR mechanisms – by segments ............................................. 210

Table 64a. Outcome of the most recent ADR case – by country .................................................... 211

Table 64b. Outcome of the most recent ADR case – by segments ................................................. 212

Table 65a. Have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers? – by country ........ 213

Table 65b. Have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers? – by segments .... 214

Table 66a. Retailers prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem

through... – by country ....................................................................................................................... 215

Table 66b. Retailers prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem

through... – by segments ................................................................................................................... 216

Table 67a. Estimated number of (un)safe non-food products – by country .................................. 217

Table 67b. Estimated number of (un)safe non-food products – by segments .............................. 218

Table 68a. Are companies a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to

consumer or commercial issues for your sector / market? – by country ....................................... 219

Table 68b. Are companies a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to

consumer or commercial issues for your sector / market? – by segments ................................... 220


page 85

Table 1a. Size of the company – by country

QUESTION: B2. How many employees do you have in your company?

Total N % 10-49 % 50-249 % 250+ % DK/NA

EU27 6970 86.1 11.7 2.2 0

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 87.9 10.1 2 0

Bulgaria 250 87.6 10.7 1.7 0

Czech Rep. 250 85.2 12.6 2.2 0

Denmark 253 84.3 13.5 2.2 0

Germany 401 85.9 11.8 2.1 0.2

Estonia 150 85.2 12.6 1.6 0.5

Greece 250 87.7 11 1.3 0

Spain 400 88.3 9.9 1.8 0

France 400 85.2 12.3 2.4 0

Ireland 200 85.3 12.9 1.8 0

Italy 400 89.2 9.1 1.8 0

Cyprus 150 84.1 13.9 2.1 0

Latvia 150 86.1 12.2 1.6 0

Lithuania 200 85.2 12.8 2 0

Luxembourg 150 82.3 14.7 2.9 0

Hungary 253 86.8 11.4 1.9 0

Malta 150 81 17.2 1.8 0

Netherlands 250 84.9 12.8 2.2 0

Austria 250 86.9 11.1 2 0

Poland 400 76.8 19.6 3.6 0

Portugal 257 87.4 10.6 2 0

Romania 250 85.8 12.3 2 0

Slovenia 150 83.8 13.7 2.5 0

Slovakia 250 86.7 11.1 2.2 0

Finland 252 82.9 13.5 3.5 0

Sweden 250 84.4 13.1 2.5 0

United Kingdom 401 85.6 11.8 2.5 0

Norway 200 87.1 10.6 2.3 0

Iceland 150 83.2 13.6 3.2 0


page 86

Table 1b. Size of the company – by segments

QUESTION: B2. How many employees do you have in your company?

Total N % 10-49 % 50-249 % 250+ % DK/NA

EU27 6970 86.1 11.7 2.2 0

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 100 0 0 0

50-249 employees 817 0 100 0 0

250+ empolyees 151 0 0 100 0

OUTLET IN OTHER EU COUNTRY

Have outlet(s) in another EU country

722 73 19.6 7.5 0

No outlet(s) in another EU country

5692 87.3 11.1 1.5 0

DISTANCE SALES CHANNELS UTILISED

Uses distance sales channels 4892 84.2 13.3 2.5 0.1

Does not use distance sales channels

1994 91.2 7.5 1.3 0

CROSS-BORDER DISTANT SALES TO EU

Do distant cross border sales 1773 81.6 15.7 2.7 0

Domestic sales only 4952 88.1 10.1 1.8 0.1

ADHERENCE TO A CODE OF CONDUCT

Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 84.2 13.1 2.6 0.1

Do not adhere to a formal code of conduct

4098 87.7 10.7 1.6 0

INFORMED ABOUT LEGAL OBLIGATIONS TOWARDS

Fully informed 1574 81.3 15.1 3.6 0

Well informed 4168 87.3 10.9 1.8 0.1

Less than well informed 1149 88.3 10.4 1.4 0


page 87

Table 2a. Turnover of the company in 2008 – by country

QUESTION: C1. What was your companies‟ turnover in 2008?

Total N

% Up to 1

million

euro

% More

than 1

million

and up to

2 million

euro

% More

than 2

million

euro and

up to euro

10 million

% More

than euro

10 million % Refusal % DK/NA

EU27 6970 12.5 8.3 15.2 9.1 21 33.9

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 4.1 1.6 5.9 3.8 22 62.6

Bulgaria 250 20.2 4.6 2.3 3.2 30.9 38.9

Czech Rep. 250 11.8 6.6 11.2 6.1 21.1 43.2

Denmark 253 6 12.9 31.4 21.4 8.3 20

Germany 401 17.7 8.9 15.5 13.1 19.3 25.6

Estonia 150 20.3 15.7 18.1 4.4 15.5 25.8

Greece 250 16.4 14.3 26.3 6.1 9.7 27.2

Spain 400 10.9 8.1 11 7.1 14.6 48.1

France 400 7.7 11.1 18.8 7.2 24.4 30.8

Ireland 200 9.3 3.3 25.3 10.1 32.6 19.4

Italy 400 8.2 6.9 8.4 4.7 33.5 38.2

Cyprus 150 18.2 9.5 13.3 6.8 15 37.1

Latvia 150 46 5.4 5.6 0.5 6.2 36.2

Lithuania 200 32.7 13.2 11.9 3 20.5 18.7

Luxembourg 150 3.5 7.5 9.9 5.4 22.6 51.1

Hungary 253 29 10.3 8.6 0.5 27.4 24.3

Malta 150 8.9 1.8 6.1 2 20.2 61

Netherlands 250 11.5 8.7 12.1 11.5 27.3 28.8

Austria 250 5.6 4.2 16.9 15.3 26.3 31.6

Poland 400 13.3 6.8 17.8 8.5 26.2 27.4

Portugal 257 2.2 3.6 29.7 8.7 12.8 42.9

Romania 250 27.1 4.2 7.8 7.5 18.1 35.2

Slovenia 150 16.4 21.9 18.5 11.8 5.9 25.5

Slovakia 250 12.2 1.6 6.5 4.5 48 27.2

Finland 252 8.3 15.3 32.3 27.2 2.1 14.8

Sweden 250 10.7 9.4 35.6 15.8 11.3 17.1

United Kingdom 401 9.5 8.5 15.2 9.2 18.4 39.2

Norway 200 5.4 18.7 43.7 20.6 0 11.7

Iceland 150 22.6 21.2 20.9 10.4 14.4 10.4


page 88

Table 2b. Turnover of the company in 2008 – by segments

QUESTION: C1. What was your companies‟ turnover in 2008?

Total N

% Up to

1

million

euro

% More

than 1

million

and up

to 2

million

euro

% More

than 2

million

euro

and up

to euro

10

million

% More

than

euro 10

million

%

Refusal

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 12.5 8.3 15.2 9.1 21 33.9

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 13.9 9 15.8 6.4 21.2 33.7

50-249 employees 817 5.1 4.5 13 24 20.1 33.3

250+ empolyees 151 0.6 1.3 3.8 33.9 18.2 42.2



722 5.9 4.3 16.4 12.1 20.2 41.1


5692 13.5 9.1 15.2 9.2 20.1 32.9


Uses distance sales channels 4892 12 8.2 15.3 10.6 19 34.9


1994 14.1 8.6 15.3 5.2 26 30.9


Do distant cross border sales 1773 9.8 9.5 17.5 12.8 19 31.4

Domestic sales only 4952 13.8 8.2 14.8 7.9 21.6 33.6


Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 12.5 8.3 16 11.7 20.1 31.4


4098 13.1 8.8 15.1 7.8 21.5 33.6


Fully informed 1574 11.1 6.4 14 9.2 22.5 36.8

Well informed 4168 12.8 9 15.6 9.8 21.4 31.5

Less than well informed 1149 14.4 8.8 15.6 6.8 17.2 37.2


page 89

Table 3a. Do companies have a legal service or a lawyer? – by country

QUESTION: C2. Do you have a legal service or a lawyer in your company?

Total N % Yes % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 36.5 62.9 0.7

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 29.6 70 0.3

Bulgaria 250 47.7 51.6 0.7

Czech Rep. 250 39.1 59.2 1.7

Denmark 253 31.9 67.4 0.7

Germany 401 20.6 79.1 0.3

Estonia 150 16.6 83 0.4

Greece 250 62.1 37.9 0

Spain 400 65 35 0

France 400 37 62.8 0.2

Ireland 200 17.7 81.7 0.6

Italy 400 30.1 68.2 1.6

Cyprus 150 58.5 39.7 1.8

Latvia 150 21.3 77.3 1.4

Lithuania 200 19.7 80.2 0.1

Luxembourg 150 25.8 74.2 0

Hungary 253 33.5 66.2 0.2

Malta 150 64.7 35 0.4

Netherlands 250 19.1 80.5 0.4

Austria 250 19.5 80.5 0

Poland 400 67.4 31.8 0.8

Portugal 257 80.8 19.2 0

Romania 250 45.4 54.6 0

Slovenia 150 29.3 70.7 0

Slovakia 250 34.6 64.1 1.3

Finland 252 28.2 70.9 0.8

Sweden 250 54 44.8 1.2

United Kingdom 401 31.2 67 1.7

Norway 200 26.6 73.2 0.2

Iceland 150 24.4 75.6 0


page 90

Table 3b. Do companies have a legal service or a lawyer? – by segments

QUESTION: C2. Do you have a legal service or a lawyer in your company?


EU27 6970 36.5 62.9 0.7

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 33.9 65.6 0.6

50-249 employees 817 48.3 51 0.7

250+ empolyees 151 74.9 23.6 1.5



722 54.2 45.2 0.6


5692 34.7 64.7 0.5


Uses distance sales channels 4892 38.4 60.8 0.8


1994 32.3 67.4 0.4


Do distant cross border sales 1773 36.7 63 0.4

Domestic sales only 4952 35.9 63.5 0.6


Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 36.1 63.2 0.7


4098 36.6 62.9 0.5


Fully informed 1574 49.3 50.4 0.3

Well informed 4168 33.9 65.4 0.7

Less than well informed 1149 28.6 70.5 0.9


page 91

Table 4a. Companies‟ sales channels – by country

QUESTION: C3_01-09. Which of the following sales channels do you use?

% of “Mentioned” shown

Total N

In-

premise

s sales Internet Phone Post

Doorstep

selling

Other

out-of-

premises

channels DK/NA

EU27 6970 75.4 50.7 43.4 29.2 7.3 25 1.2

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 68.1 53.1 38.7 18.4 5.6 17.4 3.3

Bulgaria 250 85.6 26.8 20.8 9.7 1 14.6 1.1

Czech Rep. 250 66.1 46.3 31.9 19.8 2.7 21.8 5.2

Denmark 253 80.1 49.9 42.5 4.7 11.2 40.3 7.1

Germany 401 73.9 53.7 45.3 31 4.1 24.9 2.1

Estonia 150 62.4 37.1 28.3 13.9 4.6 26.1 1.1

Greece 250 73.3 44.4 30.8 18.4 11.2 23.6 0

Spain 400 60.1 44 35.3 14.1 8.1 29.2 0

France 400 84.9 52.2 43.7 34.9 6.8 10.2 0

Ireland 200 79.5 57.5 68.6 52 9.8 40.4 4

Italy 400 81.4 47 36.7 20.1 4.7 9.6 0.9

Cyprus 150 82.2 26 33.8 8.5 5.9 26.8 1.2

Latvia 150 58.2 29.1 22.5 9.1 18.4 32 0

Lithuania 200 72.3 46 35 18.4 2.3 23.9 0.1

Luxembourg 150 89.9 30.9 30.9 29.7 9.6 3.8 0

Hungary 253 78.3 34.4 28.1 17.8 18.9 19 0

Malta 150 85.9 57.8 52.6 28.5 6.2 35.8 1.1

Netherlands 250 72.1 49.1 28.9 17.8 8.2 23 0.3

Austria 250 93.9 57 44 31.2 3.2 15.9 1

Poland 400 78.6 35.3 33.4 16.3 18.4 28.9 0.8

Portugal 257 93.5 30.2 24.6 11.3 12.9 27.9 0.2

Romania 250 64.4 23.3 13.5 6.1 12 24.4 1.9

Slovenia 150 82.2 54.5 40.7 36.9 10.7 33.1 1.4

Slovakia 250 86.1 35.3 31.5 13.5 3.2 17.8 0.4

Finland 252 79.9 47.5 42.4 12.4 3.8 13.2 1.5

Sweden 250 91.8 54.3 45.4 23.5 3.1 15.5 0.8

United Kingdom 401 72.2 71.2 73.6 64 8.6 45.5 1

Norway 200 74.3 64.5 68.7 42.8 0.6 28.6 0.2

Iceland 150 83.9 54.3 57.3 35.9 12.5 34.4 0


page 92

Table 4b. Companies‟ sales channels – by segments

QUESTION: C3_01-09. Which of the following sales channels do you use?


To

tal

N

In-p

rem

ise

s

sale

s

Inte

rnet

Ph

on

e

Po

st

Do

ors

tep

sell

ing

Oth

er o

ut-

of-

pre

mis

es

cha

nn

els

DK

/NA

EU27 6970 75.4 50.7 43.4 29.2 7.3 25 1.2

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 76.2 49.1 42.9 27.7 6.7 23.9 1

50-249 employees 817 71 60.8 47.2 38.4 10.8 30.8 2.2

250+ empolyees 151 67.1 56.8 43.8 37.5 10.6 36.6 3.1



722 63.2 62 53.4 33.6 9.2 33.1 0.7


5692 76.6 50.2 42.9 29.7 7.2 24.8 1.1


Uses distance sales channels 4892 66.7 72.2 61.9 41.5 10.4 35.6 0


1994 99.8 0 0 0 0 0 0


Do distant cross border sales 1773 69.7 72.6 59.5 40.8 8.6 34.2 0.4

Domestic sales only 4952 77.7 41.8 36.9 24.4 6.8 21.3 1.3


Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 77.6 57.3 49.3 36 7.1 27.4 1.2


4098 74.8 45.8 39.2 24.5 7.2 23.2 1.2


Fully informed 1574 74 57.4 48.5 34.2 9.4 26.7 1.5

Well informed 4168 76.5 49.4 41.2 28 6.4 24.3 1.2

Less than well informed 1149 74.9 46.2 43.2 26.4 7.5 25.3 0.8


page 93

Table 5a. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales – part 1 – by country

QUESTION: C4. Which of the following product categories is the largest in your sales?

To

tal

N

% F

oo

d a

nd

dri

nk

s

% C

loth

ing

, fo

otw

ear

an

d

acc

esso

rie

s (i

ncl

ud

ing

jew

ell

ery

a

nd

co

smet

ics)

% F

urn

itu

re,

furn

ish

ing

s a

nd

d

eco

rati

on

(i

ncl

ud

ing

do

-it-

yo

urs

elf

go

od

s a

nd

m

ain

ten

an

ce

pro

du

cts)

% H

ou

seh

old

a

pp

lia

nce

s,

elec

tro

nic

go

od

s a

nd

in

form

ati

on

te

chn

olo

gy

go

od

s

% L

eisu

re g

oo

ds

(ex

. b

oo

ks,

au

dio

vis

ua

l m

ate

ria

l, t

oy

s...

)

% C

ars

, m

oto

r v

ehic

les

an

d p

art

s

EU27 6970 8.3 4 3.8 3.6 1.4 13.6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 15.8 6 5.4 1.5 2.4 10.6

Bulgaria 250 3.7 6.4 6.7 7.4 1.7 11.7

Czech Rep. 250 3.8 1.7 4.6 5.2 1.2 8.7

Denmark 253 13.8 2.8 3.8 3.4 1 12.2

Germany 401 14.1 1.6 2.7 3.1 0.9 12

Estonia 150 8.8 3.7 3.3 4 1.6 9.7

Greece 250 0.8 9 6.9 9.3 1.5 24

Spain 400 4.7 4.7 3.7 3.2 2.8 14.6

France 400 4.6 6.6 6 2.1 2 13.1

Ireland 200 3.8 7.1 5 5.2 2 12.6

Italy 400 3 7.4 1.7 2.3 1 20.9

Cyprus 150 12.9 10.5 5.9 6.1 0.3 5.6

Latvia 150 18.3 2.1 3 2.4 1.4 5.3

Lithuania 200 1.2 7.9 8.8 7.3 0.8 13.6

Luxembourg 150 3.7 3.2 6.8 4 0.6 14.3

Hungary 253 17.9 1.1 0.9 4 0.4 12.4

Malta 150 16.6 9.8 3.7 4.7 2.9 5.6

Netherlands 250 13.9 5.1 4 0.5 2.3 11.3

Austria 250 1.7 5.5 3.5 2.3 2.1 15.4

Poland 400 3.9 4.4 9.3 5.4 0.5 16.6

Portugal 257 14.7 2.1 2.2 0.9 1 21.8

Romania 250 13.6 5.6 5.5 6.2 1.9 15.9

Slovenia 150 3.4 5.2 2.6 6.2 0.5 13.9

Slovakia 250 10.8 2.8 3.5 6 1.7 11.6

Finland 252 12.3 2.5 1.3 4.1 0.6 4.6

Sweden 250 20.8 2.2 1.6 2 0.4 7.9

United Kingdom 401 5.2 1.5 3 5.3 1 11.1

Norway 200 4.1 6.3 5.3 5 3.1 20.1

Iceland 150 15.4 2.1 1.8 7.9 1.4 5.7


page 94

Table 5b. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales – part 1 – by segments


To

tal

N

% F

oo

d a

nd

dri

nk

s

% C

loth

ing

, fo

otw

ear

an

d

acc

esso

rie

s (i

ncl

ud

ing

jew

ell

ery

a

nd

co

smet

ics)

% F

urn

itu

re,

furn

ish

ing

s a

nd

d

eco

rati

on

(i

ncl

ud

ing

do

-it-

yo

urs

elf

go

od

s a

nd

m

ain

ten

an

ce

pro

du

cts)

% H

ou

seh

old

a

pp

lia

nce

s,

elec

tro

nic

go

od

s a

nd

in

form

ati

on

te

chn

olo

gy

go

od

s

% L

eisu

re g

oo

ds

(ex

. b

oo

ks,

au

dio

vis

ua

l m

ate

ria

l, t

oy

s...

)

% C

ars

, m

oto

r v

ehic

les

an

d p

art

s

EU27 6970 8.3 4 3.8 3.6 1.4 13.6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 8.5 4.1 3.9 3.7 1.4 13.6

50-249 employees 817 7.1 3.2 3 2.8 1.3 13.9

250+ empolyees 151 5.6 6.3 2.4 3 2.3 8.2



722 4.6 4.3 3.1 5.7 1.6 7.6


5692 8.6 3.7 3.9 3.4 1.3 14.8


Uses distance sales channels

4892 4.3 1.6 2.7 3.7 1.5 12.9


1994 18.2 10.1 6.4 3.5 1.2 15.6


Do distant cross border sales

1773 2.5 2 3.6 3.9 1.8 11.8



Adhere to a code of conduct

2536 8.9 2.6 2.6 2.5 1.7 13.2


409

8 8 4.8 4.5 3.9 1.3 14.1


Fully informed 1574 7.4 4 2.8 3.2 1.5 11.3

Well informed 4168 8.7 3.6 3.8 3.9 1.4 14.3

Less than well informed

1149 7.8 5.4 5 2.8 1.5 14.5


page 95

Table 6a. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales – part 2 – by country


To

tal

N

% O

ther

go

od

s

% F

ina

nci

al

serv

ices

%

Tel

eco

mm

un

ica

tio

ns

serv

ices

% E

ner

gy

or

tra

nsp

ort

se

rvic

es

% H

ote

ls a

nd

re

sta

ura

nts

% O

ther

se

rvic

es

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 8.3 5.7 2.6 6.6 19.1 23.1 0.1

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 2.9 3.6 2 4.7 9.9 33.1 2.1

Bulgaria 250 16.3 4.4 0.3 13.3 14.4 13.7 0

Czech Rep. 250 20.5 1.3 1.7 7.9 11 32.5 0

Denmark 253 8.4 4.5 1.3 16.3 14.2 17.9 0.4

Germany 401 6.3 5 3.5 8.1 22.2 20.5 0

Estonia 150 12.3 3.4 1.3 21.2 1.1 29.5 0

Greece 250 5.9 1.3 4.2 1 22.1 13.9 0

Spain 400 10.5 1.6 3.7 11.8 17.7 21.1 0

France 400 6.5 1.5 1.8 5.5 34.6 15.6 0.2

Ireland 200 8.5 7.3 3.4 8.7 7.3 28.9 0.1

Italy 400 6 0.6 0.6 1.2 33.2 22.1 0

Cyprus 150 7.8 1.2 6 1.9 17.4 24.4 0

Latvia 150 18 1 2.6 8.1 5.2 32.6 0

Lithuania 200 11.9 4 7.5 11.8 0 25.3 0

Luxembourg 150 7.3 5.2 0.9 3.7 10.3 40 0

Hungary 253 10.1 0 1 6.9 15.7 29 0.7

Malta 150 7.3 2.2 2 11.2 20.3 13.8 0

Netherlands 250 7.5 13.7 2.5 1.5 13.7 24 0.1

Austria 250 10.6 31.1 1.1 4.2 0.4 22 0

Poland 400 18.9 2.4 1.2 8.8 8.9 19.7 0

Portugal 257 8.9 6.4 4.2 0.9 2.9 33.9 0

Romania 250 12.6 1.8 3.2 5.3 9.4 19 0

Slovenia 150 11.2 3.9 5.3 5.9 14.9 27 0

Slovakia 250 15.6 3.3 1.7 4.5 18.4 20 0

Finland 252 14.6 12.6 2.8 1.1 4.6 38.8 0

Sweden 250 6.3 11.3 1.9 6.9 20.8 18 0

United Kingdom 401 5.7 13.2 3 5.6 14 31.3 0

Norway 200 4.4 0.7 5.2 12.7 14.7 18.6 0

Iceland 150 7.9 3.6 0.3 6.2 17.5 30.2 0


page 96

Table 6b. Companies‟ largest product categories in their sales - part 2 – by segments


To

tal

N

% O

ther

go

od

s

% F

ina

nci

al

serv

ices

%

Tel

eco

mm

un

ica

tio

ns

serv

ices

% E

ner

gy

or

tra

nsp

ort

se

rvic

es

% H

ote

ls a

nd

re

sta

ura

nts

% O

ther

se

rvic

es

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 8.3 5.7 2.6 6.6 19.1 23.1 0.1

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 8.7 4.9 2.7 5.8 19 23.5 0.1

50-249 employees 817 5.8 9.2 1.6 10.8 21.6 19.7 0.1

250+ empolyees 151 4.4 18.7 3.6 12.3 7.6 25.4 0.2



722 6.2 6.8 3 5.4 26.4 25.2 0.2


5692 8.5 5.7 2.7 6.7 18.1 22.3 0



4892 6.8 7.4 3.3 7.5 23.3 24.9 0.1


1994 12 1.9 1 3.5 9 17.5 0.1



1773 6.3 4.9 3 6.5 30.1 23.7 0




2536 7.2 9.5 2.6 6.3 18.6 24.2 0.1


4098 8.9 3.2 2.5 6.9 19.3 22.5 0.1


Fully informed 1574 6.2 13.1 2 7.8 19.7 20.8 0.1

Well informed 4168 8.8 4.2 2.6 5.9 19.5 23.2 0.1

Less than well informed 1149 9.5 1.6 2 7.1 17.8 25 0.1


page 97

Table 7a. Number of EU countries where companies have subsidiaries or retail outlets – by country

QUESTION: C5. In how many EU countries outside [YOUR COUNTRY] do you have subsidiaries or retail outlets?

Total N % None % 1 % 2 - 3 % 4 + % DK/NA

EU27 6970 81.7 3.1 2.3 5 8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 49.3 4.9 3.8 11.1 30.9

Bulgaria 250 89.6 1.7 2.3 1.2 5.2

Czech Rep. 250 82.4 8.3 0.9 8.2 0.2

Denmark 253 77.5 5.4 4.4 4.8 7.9

Germany 401 91.3 1.5 1.9 3.1 2.1

Estonia 150 77 6.1 4.4 2.9 9.6

Greece 250 89.5 4 1.6 3.4 1.5

Spain 400 79.2 4.6 1.9 7.4 7

France 400 74.2 3.3 4.3 10.7 7.6

Ireland 200 80.1 4.2 4.8 3.5 7.4

Italy 400 73.8 1.7 0.2 2.3 22.1

Cyprus 150 77.8 4.3 1.2 3.4 13.3

Latvia 150 95.1 1.8 1.7 0.4 1.1

Lithuania 200 84.1 2 3.5 2.2 8.2

Luxembourg 150 70.9 7.4 4.3 12 5.4

Hungary 253 70.2 0.7 1.8 0.8 26.5

Malta 150 79.4 2 1.7 5.2 11.6

Netherlands 250 75.7 5.2 2.6 4.4 12.1

Austria 250 92.8 2.2 0.5 1.3 3.2

Poland 400 86.5 3.7 3.5 4.5 1.7

Portugal 257 80.3 6.5 3.8 8.1 1.3

Romania 250 75.6 2.4 1.4 1.7 19

Slovenia 150 90.8 3.1 2.5 1.2 2.4

Slovakia 250 73.2 15.4 6 4.6 0.8

Finland 252 65.9 3.8 2.5 4.7 23

Sweden 250 74.4 1.7 1.2 3.8 18.8

United Kingdom 401 87.7 2.1 2.4 4.8 3

Norway 200 82.4 2.3 4.7 6.6 4.1

Iceland 150 81.9 9.8 1.4 0.8 6


page 98

Table 7b. Number of EU countries where companies have subsidiaries or retail outlets – by segments

QUESTION: C5. In how many EU countries outside [YOUR COUNTRY] do you have subsidiaries or retail outlets?

Total N % None % 1 % 2 - 3 % 4 + % DK/NA

EU27 6970 81.7 3.1 2.3 5 8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 82.9 2.6 1.9 4.3 8.3

50-249 employees 817 77.6 5.3 4.7 7.2 5.2

250+ empolyees 151 55 8.5 7.5 19.5 9.6



722 0 29.5 22.3 48.2 0


5692 100 0 0 0 0


Uses distance sales channels 4892 81.3 3.4 2.6 6 6.7


1994 82.8 2.3 1.5 2.7 10.6


Do distant cross border sales 1773 70.3 7.2 5.4 12.7 4.3

Domestic sales only 4952 87.1 1.6 1.1 2.1 8.1


Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 80.9 3.9 2.3 6.1 6.8


4098 82.6 2.5 2.3 4.3 8.3


Fully informed 1574 77.1 4 2.9 6.9 9

Well informed 4168 83.3 2.9 2 4.1 7.6

Less than well informed 1149 82.3 2.1 2.7 5.3 7.6


page 99

Table 8a. Number of EU countries to which companies offer cross-border sales to final consumers – by country

QUESTION: C6. To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?

Total N % None % 1 % 2 - 3 % 4 + % DK/NA

EU27 6970 71 4.6 6.4 14.4 3.5

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 60.7 3.6 4.9 6.6 24.1

Bulgaria 250 88.2 1 3.9 6.8 0.1

Czech Rep. 250 68.1 6.7 7.9 14.2 3.2

Denmark 253 66.1 6.5 8.1 15.8 3.5

Germany 401 64.8 7.2 8.3 19.3 0.4

Estonia 150 61 3.5 10.5 17.8 7.1

Greece 250 66.8 5.2 6.9 19.9 1.3

Spain 400 80.1 3.6 3.5 11.9 0.9

France 400 71.4 2.2 5.6 16.6 4.1

Ireland 200 58 9.5 12.2 15.4 4.8

Italy 400 75.3 0.4 2.4 19.5 2.5

Cyprus 150 69.5 4.2 7.2 12 7.2

Latvia 150 86.1 3 4.7 6.3 0

Lithuania 200 68.1 3.7 12.9 9.6 5.8

Luxembourg 150 53.4 2.3 21.4 22.2 0.8

Hungary 253 78.5 4 6.5 8 3

Malta 150 65.8 1.5 5.8 16.5 10.4

Netherlands 250 70.1 5.8 8.9 10.3 4.9

Austria 250 55.9 12.2 13 17.4 1.5

Poland 400 67 7.6 8 14.4 3

Portugal 257 84.7 2.8 4.4 8 0.2

Romania 250 87.8 1.9 1 5 4.2

Slovenia 150 58 7.7 10 15.3 9.1

Slovakia 250 68.4 8.1 9 11.9 2.6

Finland 252 80.5 4.9 3.8 6.8 4

Sweden 250 79 3.2 2.7 8.8 6.2

United Kingdom 401 68.5 4.7 7.6 12.1 7.2

Norway 200 72.4 2.4 3.5 14.8 6.8

Iceland 150 62 2.9 2.8 25.7 6.6


page 100

Table 8b. Number of EU countries to which companies offer cross-border sales to final consumers – by segments

QUESTION: C6. To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?

Total N % None % 1 % 2 - 3 % 4 + % DK/NA

EU27 6970 71 4.6 6.4 14.4 3.5

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 72.7 4.3 6.2 13.5 3.2

50-249 employees 817 61.1 6.2 7.6 20.2 4.8

250+ empolyees 151 58.6 6.3 5.6 20.1 9.4



722 32.5 9.7 13.4 39.2 5.3


5692 75.8 4.3 5.9 11.8 2.3




1994 88.8 2.8 3.3 3.6 1.5


Do distant cross border sales 1773 0 18.1 25.1 56.8 0

Domestic sales only 4952 100 0 0 0 0




4098 73.6 4.5 6.2 13 2.7


Fully informed 1574 68.2 3.2 5.7 17.7 5.2

Well informed 4168 73 4.9 6 13.4 2.7

Less than well informed 1149 68.4 5.6 8.9 14 3.2


page 101

Table 9a. Number of EU countries where companies would make cross-border sales if laws regulating transactions were the same in the EU – by country

QUESTION: C7. If the provisions of the laws regulating transactions with consumers were the same throughout the

27 Member States to how many EU countries would you be interested in making cross-border sales to final

consumers?

Total N % None % 1 % 2-3 % 4-6 % 7-25 % 26 % DK/NA

EU27 6970 58.3 2.9 4.6 5.2 4.5 15.4 9.1

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 64.4 2.7 2.9 2.5 4.4 0.8 22.3

Bulgaria 250 75.4 1.3 4.6 4.2 2.2 11.5 0.7

Czech Rep. 250 56.8 0.4 4.3 4.2 5.4 13.5 15.3

Denmark 253 55.8 3.8 4.6 6.6 7.5 14 7.7

Germany 401 55.4 4.2 6.1 8.2 6.3 18 1.7

Estonia 150 50 4.9 6.5 5.2 3.2 1.3 28.8

Greece 250 35.5 2 6.3 4.2 7.8 27.9 16.4

Spain 400 64.8 1.7 1.4 5.3 4.8 15.7 6.3

France 400 59.6 1.7 4.4 3.6 3.1 16 11.7

Ireland 200 43 5.7 6.8 8.9 7.4 19.4 8.9

Italy 400 69 0.4 1.6 2.8 2.8 13.2 10.2

Cyprus 150 48.3 0.3 8.2 2.4 10.1 10.8 19.9

Latvia 150 66.7 0.8 10 3.8 4.9 9.6 4.2

Lithuania 200 42 3.3 12.9 4.7 1.6 11.4 24.2

Luxembourg 150 49.3 0.6 13.9 6.6 3.1 18.3 8.2

Hungary 253 60.9 3.9 8.9 9.4 4.3 2 10.5

Malta 150 47.5 2.6 3.7 2.6 5.4 18 20.3

Netherlands 250 59.2 7.3 6 3.5 3.4 8.2 12.4

Austria 250 55.6 4.4 11.3 5.5 7.6 5.9 9.7

Poland 400 39.8 3.8 5.8 7.3 8.8 20.4 14.2

Portugal 257 69.4 7.6 1.2 3.3 4.6 10 3.8

Romania 250 51.1 1.2 9.3 6.2 5.4 8.3 18.5

Slovenia 150 36.8 2.9 6.4 11 1.8 22.4 18.7

Slovakia 250 57.7 5.1 7.2 7.1 8.6 5.3 8.9

Finland 252 71.8 3.5 1.3 3.2 1.4 6.1 12.7

Sweden 250 64.8 1.4 3.2 5 3.3 6.2 16.2

United Kingdom 401 56 2.8 3.4 3.8 2.2 22.6 9.2

Norway 200 62.6 1.7 5.9 2.4 5.5 9.4 12.6

Iceland 150 41.4 0.9 1.4 4.4 3.4 35.8 12.7


page 102

Table 9b. Number of EU countries where companies would make cross-border sales if laws regulating transactions were the same in the EU – by segments

QUESTION: C7. If the provisions of the laws regulating transactions with consumers were the same throughout the

27 Member States to how many EU countries would you be interested in making cross-border sales to final

consumers?

Total

N

%

None % 1 % 2-3 % 4-6 % 7-25 % 26

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 58.3 2.9 4.6 5.2 4.5 15.4 9.1

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 59.8 2.8 4.7 5 4 15.1 8.5

50-249 employees 817 48.6 3.4 4.1 6.9 7.9 17.6 11.4

250+ empolyees 151 49.4 1.4 4.8 3.4 7.5 14.7 18.8



722 27.2 3.4 5.5 5.5 12.7 28.9 16.9


5692 61.3 2.9 4.6 5.5 3.6 14.8 7.3



4892 50.9 2.8 5.2 6.4 5.6 19.7 9.4


1994 75.9 3.1 3.3 2.4 1.9 5.2 8



1773 14.3 4.7 8.3 10.7 13.5 37.4 11.1




2536 58.7 3.1 5 5.5 6.1 14.4 7.2


4098 58.8 2.7 4.6 5.2 3.7 15.5 9.6


Fully informed 1574 56.8 2 4.6 6 4.8 15 10.9

Well informed 4168 59.6 3 4.5 5.1 4.6 14.9 8.3



page 103

Table 10a. Self-perceived level of information about legal obligations towards consumers – by country

QUESTION: A1. How well informed are you about your legal obligations towards consumers arising from consumer

legislation in your country?

Total N

% Fully

informed

% Well

informed

% Not well

informed

% Not

informed at

all % DK/NA

EU27 6970 22.6 59.8 13.2 3.3 1.1

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 44.7 38.7 11.6 4.3 0.7

Bulgaria 250 28.8 64.8 5.5 0.7 0.2

Czech Rep. 250 28.9 57.5 6.8 3.3 3.6

Denmark 253 20.2 58.4 14.5 5.3 1.5

Germany 401 17.9 66.3 14.5 0.4 0.9

Estonia 150 21.5 68 8.3 0 2.3

Greece 250 31.2 51.1 12.5 5.2 0.1

Spain 400 24 61 11.5 3.4 0.2

France 400 23.3 52.4 15.1 8.6 0.6

Ireland 200 17.9 62.3 15.7 2.5 1.6

Italy 400 16.3 67.3 13.9 2.5 0

Cyprus 150 35.9 48.6 14.3 1.2 0

Latvia 150 17.9 66.5 14.8 0.8 0

Lithuania 200 14.6 54 26 4.5 0.8

Luxembourg 150 23.8 66.7 9.1 0.5 0

Hungary 253 27 60.7 9.8 1.7 0.9

Malta 150 31.3 50.4 15.8 1 1.5

Netherlands 250 13.2 68.6 12.4 2.5 3.3

Austria 250 27.8 55.9 13.5 1.6 1.3

Poland 400 14 60.6 21.9 2.5 1

Portugal 257 33.9 59.8 6.2 0.1 0

Romania 250 22.3 67.4 8.3 0.8 1.2

Slovenia 150 18.4 69.6 10.6 1.4 0

Slovakia 250 32.3 63.2 4 0 0.5

Finland 252 12.9 59.6 22.9 3 1.7

Sweden 250 10.2 75.8 11.2 2.8 0

United Kingdom 401 29.3 49.5 12.8 5.4 3

Norway 200 18.1 69.6 11.7 0.6 0

Iceland 150 22.3 59.9 11.3 4 2.4


page 104

Table 10b. Self-perceived level of information about legal obligations towards consumers – by segments

QUESTION: A1. How well informed are you about your legal obligations towards consumers arising from consumer


Total N

% Fully

informed

% Well

informed

% Not

well

informed

% Not

informed

at all

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 22.6 59.8 13.2 3.3 1.1

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 21.3 60.7 13.5 3.4 1.1

50-249 employees 817 29 55.4 11.9 2.7 1

250+ empolyees 151 37.9 48.7 7.6 2.9 2.9



722 30.3 52.1 11.1 4.9 1.6


5692 21.3 61 13.5 3.1 1


Uses distance sales channels 4892 24.4 57.9 12.9 3.5 1.3


1994 17.9 64.6 14.3 2.6 0.7



Domestic sales only 4952 21.7 61.4 13 2.9 1.1




4098 18.3 61 15.5 4.3 0.9


Fully informed 1574 100 0 0 0 0

Well informed 4168 0 100 0 0 0

Less than well informed 1149 0 0 80 20 0


page 105

Table 11a. Anticipated consumer awareness of their rights arising from consumer legislation – by country

QUESTION: A2. And how well informed do you think consumers are about their rights arising from consumer


Total N

% Fully

informed

% Well

informed

% Not well

informed

% Not

informed at

all % DK/NA

EU27 6970 10.4 47 34.4 4.2 4.1

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 35.6 41.2 17 1.5 4.7

Bulgaria 250 7.4 40.4 45.8 2.2 4.2

Czech Rep. 250 11.7 45.3 24.3 4.8 13.9

Denmark 253 7.3 56.9 28.9 3 3.8

Germany 401 8.3 51 35.5 2.4 2.8

Estonia 150 12.8 44.9 37.7 1.1 3.4

Greece 250 5.4 36.7 41.6 14.4 2

Spain 400 10.4 46.5 35.4 5 2.7

France 400 13.7 48.8 30.4 4.7 2.4

Ireland 200 8.6 60.7 27.4 2.2 1.2

Italy 400 8.1 48.4 35 3.7 4.8

Cyprus 150 9.5 42.1 39.2 5.6 3.6

Latvia 150 2.5 60.7 30.6 2.7 3.5

Lithuania 200 6.4 26 51.8 9.2 6.5

Luxembourg 150 19.3 58.5 16.2 1.8 4.1

Hungary 253 6.7 36.4 46 7.7 3.2

Malta 150 19.1 44.4 31.1 0.4 5.1

Netherlands 250 4.5 47.7 37.7 4.1 6

Austria 250 12 48.3 33.1 2.7 3.9

Poland 400 5.2 33.7 50.3 4.6 6.2

Portugal 257 5.1 59.6 27.4 6.1 1.8

Romania 250 11.2 40.9 37.2 4.2 6.5

Slovenia 150 12.3 52.8 32.8 0 2.1

Slovakia 250 14.6 61.2 13.7 0.9 9.6

Finland 252 3.3 47.9 45.2 2.3 1.2

Sweden 250 4 40.4 43.2 8.3 4.1

United Kingdom 401 14.4 44 31.7 4.1 5.8

Norway 200 3.3 57.2 35.8 2.2 1.5

Iceland 150 4.4 43.4 47.6 1.7 2.9


page 106

Table 11b. Anticipated consumer awareness of their rights arising from consumer legislation –– by segments

QUESTION: A2. And how well informed do you think consumers are about their rights arising from consumer


Total N

% Fully

informed

% Well

informed

% Not

well

informed

% Not

informed

at all

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 10.4 47 34.4 4.2 4.1

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 10.3 47.3 33.9 4.3 4.2

50-249 employees 817 11 44.2 37.9 3.4 3.4

250+ empolyees 151 11 47.5 33.1 4.1 4.3



722 7.9 43 36.5 7.9 4.8


5692 10.2 47.7 34.6 3.5 4.1




1994 9.4 48.3 33.1 4.5 4.7







4098 9.3 47 35 4.3 4.4


Fully informed 1574 19.9 45 26.9 3.2 5

Well informed 4168 8.6 53 32.8 2.3 3.4

Less than well informed 1149 4 28.6 51.6 12.5 3.2


page 107

Table 12a. Self-perceived level of information about legislation on product safety – by country

QUESTION: A3. How well are you informed about the legislation on product safety?

Total N

% Fully

informed

% Well

informed

% Not

well

informed

% Not

informed

at all

% Not relevant because

you don't sell

products % DK/NA

EU27 6970 18.2 47.7 12.4 2.3 17.5 1.9

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 38.2 40.4 13.5 1.6 2.9 3.6

Bulgaria 250 22.9 51.9 4.8 0 20.4 0

Czech Rep. 250 23 45.9 8.2 5.7 12.8 4.4

Denmark 253 10.6 57 18 4.3 9.3 0.7

Germany 401 12.6 46.4 16.2 1.7 21.6 1.5

Estonia 150 9.1 46.8 17.8 2.1 21 3.3

Greece 250 27.2 39.6 11.4 5.5 16.4 0

Spain 400 21.4 53.9 10.9 1 11.9 1

France 400 19.4 47.4 9.8 3.3 19.5 0.6

Ireland 200 16.2 50.4 19.9 2.5 9.7 1.2

Italy 400 18.8 49.6 9.8 1.7 16.6 3.5

Cyprus 150 29.4 42.3 12.3 2.4 10.5 3

Latvia 150 20.6 43.7 12.2 0.8 22.8 0

Lithuania 200 11 31.4 30.5 8.5 16.5 2.2

Luxembourg 150 25.2 37.6 4.8 1.2 31.2 0

Hungary 253 27.4 42.6 11.9 0.8 14.6 2.8

Malta 150 40.4 39.4 8.9 1 8.1 2.2

Netherlands 250 12.1 54.9 7.5 3.2 20.8 1.6

Austria 250 19.9 48.9 12.1 2 15.3 1.8

Poland 400 13.3 39.9 24 3.4 19 0.3

Portugal 257 18.3 63.5 10.2 0.2 7.8 0

Romania 250 17.7 51.5 11.5 0.5 14.2 4.7

Slovenia 150 15.9 35.7 14.5 1.4 27.5 5.1

Slovakia 250 30.1 49.9 7.1 0 11.5 1.4

Finland 252 12.7 42.4 21.3 2.6 20.3 0.7

Sweden 250 7 27.5 19.6 10.2 33.5 2.2

United Kingdom 401 20.5 46.4 8.9 2.1 18.7 3.4

Norway 200 10.2 55.2 23.4 0.7 9.9 0.6

Iceland 150 12.7 50.1 23.2 1.4 8.4 4.2


page 108

Table 12b. Self-perceived level of information about legislation on product safety – by segments

QUESTION: A3. How well are you informed about the legislation on product safety?

Total

N

% Fully

informed

% Well

informed

% Not

well

informed

% Not

informed

at all

% Not relevant because

you don't sell

products

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 18.2 47.7 12.4 2.3 17.5 1.9

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 17.3 48.6 12.6 2.4 17.1 2

50-249 employees 817 23 42.4 11.3 2 20.1 1.3

250+ empolyees 151 25.9 39.3 10 0.6 22.5 1.7



722 20.3 42.5 10.4 3 20.4 3.4


5692 17.2 48.7 13 2.3 17.3 1.4



4892 18.5 45.3 11.4 2.3 20.9 1.6


1994 17.1 54 15.2 2.4 8.6 2.7



1773 18.1 43.3 14 2.7 19.9 2

Domestic sales only 4952 17.7 49.7 12 2.1 16.7 1.7


Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 21.3 49.5 9.8 1.4 16.6 1.4


4098 16.6 47.2 14.3 2.7 17.7 1.6


Fully informed 1574 44.6 29.5 4.1 0.2 20.3 1.2

Well informed 4168 11.3 57.5 11 1.2 17 1.9

Less than well informed 1149 7.2 38.8 29.1 9.2 14.9 1


page 109

Table 13a. Do retailers know where to look for relevant information about consumer legislation? – by country

QUESTION: A4_01-09. Do you know where you can find or get relevant information and advice about consumer

legislation either regarding your own country or other EU countries?


Total N

Yes, with regard to

legislation in my own

country

Yes, with regard to

legislation in other EU

countries

Yes, mentioned

the European Consumer

Centre specifically

No, neither for my

country nor for other EU

countries DK/NA

EU27 6970 78.2 22.2 0.9 17.1 2.1

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 64.4 9.5 1 15.4 15.2

Bulgaria 250 92.6 6.2 0.5 4.9 2

Czech Rep. 250 77.5 26.7 0.3 16.7 3.1

Denmark 253 73.3 16.8 0.5 24.9 1.5

Germany 401 81.9 20.9 0.6 14.9 1.6

Estonia 150 89 26.1 3.9 8.4 1.7

Greece 250 73 36.5 1 24.5 0.5

Spain 400 75.3 16.4 2.3 16.9 1.1

France 400 73.1 18.4 0 24.4 1.6

Ireland 200 81.5 32.9 1.2 15.7 0

Italy 400 77.4 10.6 2.7 13.3 4.5

Cyprus 150 73 18.9 0.3 24 0

Latvia 150 89 49.2 1.9 8.9 0.3

Lithuania 200 84.1 29 0 13.5 1.7

Luxembourg 150 73.3 42.1 2.9 20.1 0

Hungary 253 74.5 18.4 2.8 15.5 3.1

Malta 150 65.2 38.2 0.4 20.2 3.9

Netherlands 250 77.6 20.2 1.4 16 3.7

Austria 250 89.6 34.2 0.4 8.9 0.5

Poland 400 80.5 23.5 0 14.3 3.7

Portugal 257 90 27.9 0.7 7.3 0

Romania 250 75.4 19.9 1.4 14.8 3.2

Slovenia 150 85.4 24.9 0 13.5 1

Slovakia 250 88.7 23.8 0 1.9 3.4

Finland 252 84.2 47.9 0 12.9 1.4

Sweden 250 86.1 12.5 0 13.1 0

United Kingdom 401 75.7 34 0 23 0.9

Norway 200 71.3 17.5 0.2 24.1 1.2

Iceland 150 69.1 18.2 0 28.3 2


page 110

Table 13b. Do retailers know where to look for relevant information about consumer legislation? – by segments

QUESTION: A4_01-09. Do you know where you can find or get relevant information and advice about consumer



Total N

Yes, with regard to

legislation in my own

country

Yes, with regard to

legislation in other

EU countries

Yes, mentioned

the European Consumer

Centre specifically

No, neither for my

country nor for

other EU countries DK/NA

EU27 6970 78.2 22.2 0.9 17.1 2.1

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 77.9 20.9 0.9 17.4 2.2

50-249 employees 817 79.5 28.9 0.8 15.8 1.2

250+ empolyees 151 82.9 34 0.3 13.3 1.3



722 75.1 39.5 1.3 17.7 2.4


5692 79.1 20.5 0.7 17.3 1.6




1994 78.7 13.4 1 17.2 1.9


Do distant cross border sales 1773 74 35.2 1.4 20.1 1.8





4098 76.1 20.1 0.7 19.6 2.2


Fully informed 1574 85.7 28.7 0.6 9.7 1.8

Well informed 4168 81.9 21.2 1.2 14 1.3



page 111

Table 14a. Did retailers look for information or advice on consumer legislation in the past two years? – by country

QUESTION: A5. In the past two years, have you actively searched for information or advice on consumer legislation

(for example by contacting the consumer authorities in writing or by phone or by searching on websites?)

T

ota

l N

% Y

es

% N

o,

I a

lrea

dy

h

av

e th

is

info

rma

tio

n,

ther

e w

as

no

nee

d t

o

sea

rch

fo

r it

% N

o,

bec

au

se I

d

id n

ot

nee

d t

his

in

form

ati

on

% N

o,

bec

au

se I

d

on

't k

no

w w

her

e to

get

th

is

info

rma

tio

n

% N

o,

alt

ho

ug

h

such

in

form

ati

on

w

ou

ld b

e u

sefu

l

% N

o,

for

oth

er

rea

son

s

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 40.4 21 31.2 1.1 2.9 2 1.3

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 30 25.2 18.6 1.4 5.8 11.3 7.7

Bulgaria 250 51.6 15.9 26.5 0.2 2.9 1.3 1.7

Czech Rep. 250 40.3 17.2 23.8 4.1 6.2 4.1 4.4

Denmark 253 42.7 8.6 40.6 0.7 2.2 4.9 0.3

Germany 401 34.8 20.2 38.8 0.4 3.9 1.7 0.2

Estonia 150 37.3 17 39.4 1.7 2.2 1.3 1.1

Greece 250 46.3 16.6 30.5 2.2 2.3 1.1 1.1

Spain 400 47.7 27.4 19 1.5 3.6 0.3 0.4

France 400 27.9 26.5 41.4 1.9 1.2 0.5 0.5

Ireland 200 45.9 12.5 37.5 2.1 0.9 1.2 0

Italy 400 44.5 29.7 17.3 0.7 2 4.5 1.4

Cyprus 150 42.7 28.9 13.4 3.3 6.6 3.6 1.5

Latvia 150 32.8 24.8 36.6 4 1.5 0 0.3

Lithuania 200 34.9 23.9 25.6 1.6 6.6 6.4 1

Luxembourg 150 39.6 26.4 28.2 3.5 0.2 0.6 1.4

Hungary 253 48.2 18 23.1 1.2 4.9 3.2 1.4

Malta 150 50.7 18.2 16.6 0.2 7.9 3.9 2.6

Netherlands 250 33.7 27.7 23.9 2.1 3.8 5.7 3.2

Austria 250 35.9 23.4 36 0 0.9 2.7 1.1

Poland 400 44.4 16.8 33.6 0.6 3.4 1 0.2

Portugal 257 53 32.8 9.1 3.6 1.4 0 0.1

Romania 250 65.8 12.5 10.4 1.1 4.9 3.9 1.3

Slovenia 150 34.6 17.3 46.2 0 1.1 0.8 0

Slovakia 250 57.7 21.1 7.8 1.5 6.2 3.9 1.7

Finland 252 33 19.6 45.2 0.8 0.3 0.4 0.6

Sweden 250 44.9 14.7 35.2 0.3 0 4.8 0

United Kingdom 401 41.5 11.4 40.9 0.5 2.3 0.1 3.3

Norway 200 55.2 12.2 27.2 0.7 1.4 2.6 0.7

Iceland 150 54.6 7.8 30.7 2.3 2.4 2.3 0


page 112

Table 14b. Did retailers look for information or advice on consumer legislation in the past two years? – by segments

QUESTION: A5. In the past two years, have you actively searched for information or advice on consumer legislation

(for example by contacting the consumer authorities in writing or by phone or by searching on websites?)

To

tal

N

% Y

es

% N

o,

I a

lrea

dy

ha

ve

this

in

form

ati

on

, th

ere

wa

s n

o

nee

d t

o s

earc

h f

or

it

% N

o,

bec

au

se I

did

no

t n

eed

th

is i

nfo

rma

tio

n

% N

o,

bec

au

se I

do

n't

k

no

w w

her

e to

get

th

is

info

rma

tio

n

% N

o,

alt

ho

ug

h s

uch

in

form

ati

on

wo

uld

be

use

ful

% N

o,

for

oth

er r

easo

ns

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 40.4 21 31.2 1.1 2.9 2 1.3

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 39.6 21.2 31.9 1.1 2.8 2.1 1.2

50-249 employees 817 43.3 21.1 27 1.6 3.9 1.5 1.6

250+ empolyees 151 53.8 13.8 25.2 0.4 1.9 1.5 3.4



722 46 21.9 25.1 1.2 1.9 0.7 3.1


5692 39.9 20.7 32.4 1.1 2.9 2 1



4892 41.4 19.2 31.6 1.1 3.3 1.8 1.5


1994 38.8 25.5 29.5 1.2 2 2.4 0.7



1773 41.8 19.3 32 1 2.8 1.5 1.6




2536 48.2 20.8 24.9 0.8 2.8 1.7 0.9


4098 36.2 21.4 34.8 1.4 3 2.1 1.2


Fully informed 1574 49.9 24.5 20.2 0.6 2.1 1.1 1.6

Well informed 4168 42.8 21.8 28.6 1 2.9 1.8 1.2



page 113

Table 15a. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – FR, PL, CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, LV, PT, SE, MT, SI – by country

QUESTION: A6a. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchased on the Internet, phone or post,

what is the length of the cooling-off period in your country? How many CALENDAR days is it?

Total N % 0 % 1-7 % 8-14 % 15-21 % 22-30 % 30+

%

DK/NA

EU27 1786 6.1 28.2 21 5.4 5.5 0.7 33

COUNTRY

Belgium 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bulgaria 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Czech Rep. 250 8.8 7 30.8 1.3 9.8 1.5 40.7

Denmark 253 2.7 4.5 40.5 0.7 8 0.1 43.4

Germany 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Estonia 150 1.1 9.9 49.6 2.5 2.8 1.5 32.7

Greece 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Spain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

France 400 4.2 49.6 10 5.9 1.7 0.3 28.3

Ireland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Italy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cyprus 150 4.8 10.5 2.5 9.7 8.4 0.5 63.5

Latvia 150 0 7 37.5 1.5 10 1.2 42.8

Lithuania 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Luxembourg 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hungary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Malta 150 8.6 3.9 9.3 24.7 4.4 2.2 46.9

Netherlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Austria 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Poland 400 0.7 24.6 26.4 1.3 7.3 1.4 38.4

Portugal 257 31.4 5.9 11.1 22.1 11.1 0.3 18.1

Romania 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 150 1.4 2.6 31 11.4 14.2 7.7 31.8

Slovakia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Finland 252 1.1 13.4 40.3 0.6 6.6 1.3 36.8

Sweden 250 3.4 10.7 36.8 0.3 7.5 0.3 41

United Kingdom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Norway 200 16.9 1.8 38 3.6 9.2 1.9 28.5

Iceland 150 4.6 9.2 14.7 0.3 18.8 2 50.5


page 114

Table 15b. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – FR, PL, CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, LV, PT, SE, MT, SI – by segments

QUESTION: A6a. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchased on the Internet, phone or post,

what is the length of the cooling-off period in your country? How many CALENDAR days is it?

Total

N % 0 % 1-7 % 8-14

% 15-

21

% 22-

30 % 30+

%

DK/NA

EU27 1786 6.1 28.2 21 5.4 5.5 0.7 33

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 1503 6.8 28 20.3 5.5 5.4 0.8 33.1

50-249 employees 238 2.8 30.1 23.6 5.4 5.6 0.4 32.1

250+ empolyees 45 1.7 22.7 30.4 1.9 8 0.6 34.7



271 8.3 34.9 15 5.5 7.9 1.7 26.7


1390 6.1 27.2 22.5 5 5.2 0.6 33.3



1160 5.4 30.9 22.5 5.7 5.2 0.9 29.3


603 7.4 24 18.5 4.9 5.6 0.4 39.2



428 2.9 35 19.5 5.4 6.6 1.2 29.4




515 10.1 19.6 23.5 5.3 5.9 0.7 34.9


1212 4.7 32.1 19.6 5.6 5.1 0.8 32.2


Fully informed 390 9.8 28.9 19.6 3.7 6.2 0.3 31.5

Well informed 1035 5.8 24.1 23.1 6.7 5.9 0.5 33.9

Less than well informed 344 2.2 40.3 16.3 3.4 3.7 2 32.2


page 115

Table 16a. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – AT, BE, BG, ES, IE, LT, LU, NL, SK, UK, HU, EL, IT, RO – by country

QUESTION: A6b. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchased on the Internet, phone or

post, what is the length of the cooling-off period in your country? How many WORKING days is it?

Total N % 0 % 1-7 % 8-14 % 15-21 % 22-30 % 30+

%

DK/NA

EU27 3818 6 19.5 13.7 5.3 10.5 1.3 43.7

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 7 44.5 2.6 0.3 2.2 0.2 43.2

Bulgaria 250 13.5 7.7 0.3 0 3.4 0.2 75

Czech Rep. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Denmark 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Germany 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Estonia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Greece 250 4.4 11 5.9 11.5 4.5 2.5 60.1

Spain 400 19 18.8 2.6 12.6 4.9 1.8 40.2

France 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ireland 200 2 9.7 12.7 4.4 18.3 1.7 51.2

Italy 400 1.7 27.8 11.3 2.8 2.7 0.2 53.5

Cyprus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Latvia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lithuania 200 0 21.6 19.3 1.5 4.9 1.5 51.3

Luxembourg 150 7.9 22.9 7.7 5 2.2 2.9 51.3

Hungary 253 2.1 23 10.4 1.2 1.9 0.3 61

Malta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Netherlands 250 7 27.9 19.5 0.1 4.3 0 41.2

Austria 250 0.3 11.7 26.4 1.5 6.2 3 50.9

Poland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Portugal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Romania 250 6.4 12.1 7.2 6.1 7.9 1.7 58.6

Slovenia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Slovakia 250 8.9 24.9 11.6 7.8 13.1 0.9 32.9

Finland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sweden 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

United Kingdom 401 0.5 14.3 25.2 4.3 25.2 1.8 28.7

Norway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iceland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


page 116

Table 16b. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – AT, BE, BG, ES, IE, LT, LU, NL, SK, UK, HU, EL, IT, RO – by segments

QUESTION: A6b. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchased on the Internet, phone or

post, what is the length of the cooling-off period in your country? How many WORKING days is it?

Total

N % 0 % 1-7 % 8-14

% 15-

21

% 22-

30 % 30+

%

DK/NA

EU27 3818 6 19.5 13.7 5.3 10.5 1.3 43.7

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 3321 6.2 19.8 13.5 5.3 10.5 1.3 43.4

50-249 employees 418 4.9 17.5 15.3 4.5 10.6 1.5 45.7

250+ empolyees 78 4 16.6 13 6.9 12.4 0.3 46.8



361 5.2 26.5 11.3 7.5 11.3 1.1 37.1


3055 6.8 18.5 14.8 5.4 11.3 1.4 41.8



2745 4.8 21.7 15.9 5.5 12.6 1.5 37.9


1041 9.2 13.4 8.3 4.9 5.2 0.9 58.1



870 4.6 25 14.5 5.2 13.7 0.9 36.1




1460 5.7 17.4 18.2 6.2 11.8 1.6 39.1


2132 6.2 21 11 5 9.3 1.3 46.3


Fully informed 939 6.6 17.2 13.4 6.3 10.3 2.2 44.1

Well informed 2227 5.9 20 13.8 4.9 9.6 1.2 44.5

Less than well informed 601 5.8 21.6 13 5.4 13.5 0.5 40.2


page 117

Table 17a. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – DE – by country

QUESTION: A6c. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchased on the Internet, phone or

post, what is the length of the cooling-off period in your country? How many weeks is it?

Total N % 0 % 1-7 % 8-14 % 15-21 % 22-30 % 30+

%

DK/NA

EU27 1366 1.5 69.4 2.5 0 0.2 0 26.4

COUNTRY

Belgium 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Bulgaria 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Czech Rep. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Denmark 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Germany 401 1.5 69.4 2.5 0 0.2 0 26.4

Estonia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Greece 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Spain 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

France 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Ireland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Italy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Cyprus 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Latvia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lithuania 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Luxembourg 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Hungary 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Malta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Netherlands 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Austria 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Poland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Portugal 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Romania 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Slovakia 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Finland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Sweden 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

United Kingdom 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Norway 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Iceland 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0


page 118

Table 17b. Knowledge about the length of the “cooling-off” period for distant sales – DE – by segments

QUESTION: A6c. With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchased on the Internet, phone or

post, what is the length of the cooling-off period in your country? How many weeks is it?

Total

N % 0 % 1-7 % 8-14

% 15-

21

% 22-

30 % 30+

%

DK/NA

EU27 1366 1.5 69.4 2.5 0 0.2 0 26.4

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 1171 1.3 69.3 2.7 0 0.2 0 26.5

50-249 employees 161 2.3 70.1 2.3 0 0 0 25.3

250+ empolyees 29 3.5 66.2 0 0 0 0 30.3



90 0 74.7 4.1 0 0 0 21.2


1247 1.5 69.6 2.5 0 0.2 0 26.2



987 1.5 71.4 2.2 0 0.3 0 24.6


350 1.4 64.6 3.7 0 0 0 30.3



475 3 66 4.6 0 0.5 0 25.9

Domestic sales only 885 0.7 71.1 1.4 0 0 0 26.7



561 0.9 73.3 1.8 0 0.4 0 23.5


754 2 66.3 3.2 0 0 0 28.5


Fully informed 245 4.6 69.2 0 0 1 0 25.2

Well informed 905 0.7 73 3.6 0 0 0 22.7

Less than well informed 204 1.2 56 1.2 0 0 0 41.5


page 119

Table 18a. Knowledge about the legal period to return a defective product – by country

QUESTION: A7. Please complete the following statement correctly. - The consumer has the right to ask for a

defective product to be replace or repaired...

Total N

% Within 1 year from the date of the original

purchase

% Within 2 years from the date of the original purchase*

% Within minimum 2 years from the date of

the original purchase and

longer for some specific products

% None of the above

% DK/NA

EU27 6970 33.2 25.7 14.2 14.8 12.2

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 38.2 24.9 5.1 18.1 13.6

Bulgaria 250 18.7 11.3 6 53.7 10.3

Czech Rep. 250 5.5 64.9 20 6.4 3.2

Denmark 253 23.8 51.6 13.2 6.5 5

Germany 401 26.4 43.3 18.5 5.2 6.7

Estonia 150 29.3 36.1 10.2 8.8 15.7

Greece 250 34.1 12.6 13 22.7 17.5

Spain 400 19.4 28.8 17.4 25.8 8.5

France 400 45.1 12.5 5.8 23.9 12.6

Ireland 200 67.3 1.2 17.7 4 9.8

Italy 400 24.9 29.1 3.6 19.7 22.7

Cyprus 150 32.5 12.7 4.7 38.4 11.7

Latvia 150 27.8 29.3 22.6 15.3 4.9

Lithuania 200 31.6 16.6 10 32.8 9

Luxembourg 150 24.3 20.9 9.4 29.9 15.5

Hungary 253 33.5 5.3 16.2 31.6 13.4

Malta 150 24.3 26.2 3.4 32.6 13.4

Netherlands 250 37.1 8.9 19.5 15.6 19

Austria 250 22.6 34.7 21.5 6.8 14.4

Poland 400 36.5 28 14.4 10.3 10.9

Portugal 257 11.4 34.8 33.1 19.2 1.5

Romania 250 25.3 22.2 7.7 30.1 14.6

Slovenia 150 51.9 12.8 11.6 7.7 16.2

Slovakia 250 7.8 71.7 11.8 1.7 7.1

Finland 252 45 7.1 15.5 22.5 9.8

Sweden 250 25.8 37 19 3.5 14.6

United Kingdom 401 57 6.6 15.4 4.2 16.7

Norway 200 16.6 15 54.3 11.6 2.6

Iceland 150 32.4 26.1 24.7 8.2 8.6

*In UK (except Scotland) and IE: % Within 6 years from the date of the original purchase

In Scotland: % Within 5 years from the date of the original purchase


page 120

Table 18b. Knowledge about the legal period to return a defective product – by segments

QUESTION: A7. Please complete the following statement correctly. - The consumer has the right to ask for a

defective product to be replace or repaired...

Total N

% Within 1 year

from the date of

the original

purchase

% Within 2 years

from the date of

the original

purchase*

% Within minimum 2 years from the date of the original

purchase and longer for some specific

products

% None of the above

% DK/NA

EU27 6970 33.2 25.7 14.2 14.8 12.2

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 34.1 25.9 13.4 14.8 11.8

50-249 employees 817 26.7 24.9 17.7 15.3 15.3

250+ empolyees 151 30.4 22.1 20.6 13.5 13.4



722 33.5 23.4 15 15.1 13


5692 33.2 26.6 14.7 13.6 11.9


Uses distance sales channels 4892 34 23.3 15 14.6 13


1994 30.6 31.3 12.2 15.3 10.5



Domestic sales only 4952 32.4 27.5 13 15.8 11.4




4098 33.6 25.1 13.1 15.9 12.4


Fully informed 1574 30.1 25.3 13.7 16.8 14

Well informed 4168 32.7 26.8 14.6 14.7 11.2


*In UK (except Scotland) and IE: % Within 6 years from the date of the original purchase

In Scotland: % Within 5 years from the date of the original purchase


page 121

Table 19a. Prohibited: Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material – by country

QUESTION: A8_A. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material

Total N % Prohibited % Not prohibited % DK/NA

EU27 6970 48.5 28.6 22.9

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 56.6 25.1 18.2

Bulgaria 250 7.1 51.3 41.6

Czech Rep. 250 42.6 31 26.4

Denmark 253 69.8 13.5 16.7

Germany 401 70.7 21.5 7.7

Estonia 150 45.8 32.5 21.7

Greece 250 61 10 29

Spain 400 37.2 27.4 35.5

France 400 19.4 63 17.6

Ireland 200 43.4 32.2 24.3

Italy 400 50 21.3 28.7

Cyprus 150 46.6 22.5 30.9

Latvia 150 9.2 28.3 62.5

Lithuania 200 22.5 32 45.5

Luxembourg 150 32.3 48 19.7

Hungary 253 56.7 16.9 26.4

Malta 150 31.7 30.1 38.1

Netherlands 250 50.1 27.9 22

Austria 250 68.4 18.6 13

Poland 400 40 28.6 31.4

Portugal 257 64.8 14.9 20.3

Romania 250 32.5 32.3 35.2

Slovenia 150 63.5 23 13.5

Slovakia 250 16.6 40.8 42.6

Finland 252 72.2 15 12.7

Sweden 250 63.6 25.6 10.8

United Kingdom 401 48.2 24.2 27.6

Norway 200 58.9 28.2 12.9

Iceland 150 39.4 26.2 34.4


page 122

Table 19b. Prohibited: Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material – by segments

QUESTION: A8_A. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing material

Total N % Prohibited

% Not

prohibited % DK/NA

EU27 6970 48.5 28.6 22.9

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 47.9 28.9 23.2

50-249 employees 817 53.5 26.2 20.2

250+ empolyees 151 46.1 28.8 25.1



722 42.8 33.7 23.4


5692 49.7 27.9 22.4




1994 43.8 30.6 25.6


Do distant cross border sales 1773 52.4 27.9 19.6



Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 54.2 27 18.8


4098 45.3 29.9 24.8


Fully informed 1574 49.2 25.6 25.2

Well informed 4168 49.8 28.5 21.6



page 123

Table 20a. Prohibited: Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale – by country

QUESTION: A8_B. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without having a reasonable

quantity of products for sale


EU27 6970 52.6 31.2 16.2

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 50.3 34.2 15.5

Bulgaria 250 20.4 48.3 31.3

Czech Rep. 250 49.2 34 16.8

Denmark 253 49.9 36.6 13.5

Germany 401 71.3 21.6 7.1

Estonia 150 42.8 41.1 16.1

Greece 250 43.3 34.9 21.8

Spain 400 46.1 35.1 18.8

France 400 50.7 33.8 15.5

Ireland 200 45.6 36.1 18.3

Italy 400 54.6 22.7 22.7

Cyprus 150 47.2 29.6 23.2

Latvia 150 28.6 57.8 13.5

Lithuania 200 30.2 43.1 26.7

Luxembourg 150 52.9 21.8 25.3

Hungary 253 85.2 8 6.8

Malta 150 40.4 32.3 27.3

Netherlands 250 37.2 42 20.8

Austria 250 54.1 27.8 18.2

Poland 400 43.8 34.2 22

Portugal 257 40.6 47.5 11.8

Romania 250 36.2 46.5 17.3

Slovenia 150 42.8 43.7 13.5

Slovakia 250 29 43 28

Finland 252 70.1 22 7.9

Sweden 250 49.7 36.9 13.4

United Kingdom 401 49.1 31.6 19.3

Norway 200 63.9 24.9 11.2

Iceland 150 53.8 34.9 11.3


page 124

Table 20b. Prohibited: Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without having a reasonable quantity of products for sale – by segments

QUESTION: A8_B. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without having a reasonable

quantity of products for sale


% Not

prohibited % DK/NA

EU27 6970 52.6 31.2 16.2

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 51.9 31.7 16.4

50-249 employees 817 56.7 28.2 15.1

250+ empolyees 151 57.5 28.4 14.1



722 54.3 33.6 12.1


5692 52 31.6 16.4




1994 52.7 31.6 15.8





Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 56.4 28.6 15


4098 50.9 32.3 16.8


Fully informed 1574 55.7 26.9 17.4

Well informed 4168 52.8 31.5 15.6



page 125

Table 21a. Not prohibited: Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement – by country

QUESTION: A8_C. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement


EU27 6970 59 31.7 9.3

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 56.1 29 14.8

Bulgaria 250 28.7 50.7 20.7

Czech Rep. 250 47.6 43.7 8.7

Denmark 253 76.6 17.3 6.1

Germany 401 47.2 47.1 5.7

Estonia 150 48.5 40.9 10.6

Greece 250 53.7 34.2 12.1

Spain 400 50.2 39.1 10.7

France 400 73.2 20.7 6.1

Ireland 200 73.3 24.3 2.4

Italy 400 62.5 20.1 17.4

Cyprus 150 49.3 36.1 14.7

Latvia 150 42.1 36.2 21.6

Lithuania 200 67.9 15.3 16.9

Luxembourg 150 69.8 18.5 11.7

Hungary 253 81.8 13.1 5.1

Malta 150 63.9 19.3 16.8

Netherlands 250 38.1 50.4 11.5

Austria 250 44.7 43.2 12.1

Poland 400 37.1 44.9 18

Portugal 257 49.3 46.4 4.3

Romania 250 57.6 28.3 14.2

Slovenia 150 59.3 32.3 8.4

Slovakia 250 49.7 33 17.4

Finland 252 85.6 10.7 3.7

Sweden 250 74.9 16.5 8.6

United Kingdom 401 77.6 16.5 5.8

Norway 200 83.8 13.4 2.8

Iceland 150 69.4 24.9 5.7


page 126

Table 21b. Not prohibited: Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement – by segments

QUESTION: A8_C. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement


% Not

prohibited % DK/NA

EU27 6970 59 31.7 9.3

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 58.9 31.7 9.4

50-249 employees 817 59.2 32.3 8.5

250+ empolyees 151 61.9 28.1 10.1



722 60.2 31.9 7.9


5692 58.2 32.7 9.1


Uses distance sales channels 4892 59.3 32 8.8


1994 59.2 30.3 10.5



Domestic sales only 4952 59.9 31 9.1




4098 57.2 32 10.8


Fully informed 1574 62.8 27.4 9.8

Well informed 4168 57.9 32.9 9.2

Less than well informed 1149 58 33.9 8.2


page 127

Table 22a. Prohibited: Describing a product as “free” although it is only freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number – by country

QUESTION: A8_D. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Describing a product as 'free' although it is only freely available to customers calling a premium rate

phone number


EU27 6970 61.5 21.8 16.6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 54.8 28.8 16.4

Bulgaria 250 25.1 36.6 38.3

Czech Rep. 250 43 36 21

Denmark 253 82 7.2 10.8

Germany 401 70.8 17 12.2

Estonia 150 53.8 30.1 16.2

Greece 250 52.4 19.8 27.8

Spain 400 58.9 23.3 17.8

France 400 61.8 21.9 16.3

Ireland 200 61.6 24 14.4

Italy 400 69.5 12.3 18.2

Cyprus 150 35.2 31.4 33.4

Latvia 150 53.6 19.1 27.2

Lithuania 200 46.1 20.5 33.4

Luxembourg 150 67.1 16.8 16.1

Hungary 253 76.1 6.2 17.7

Malta 150 56.3 19.4 24.4

Netherlands 250 53.6 33 13.4

Austria 250 64.2 18.3 17.4

Poland 400 55.8 22.6 21.6

Portugal 257 57.6 31.9 10.5

Romania 250 51.8 18.6 29.6

Slovenia 150 60.7 24.5 14.7

Slovakia 250 45.3 30.1 24.6

Finland 252 78.4 10.8 10.7

Sweden 250 69.4 19.9 10.7

United Kingdom 401 56 29.5 14.5

Norway 200 78.5 14.2 7.3

Iceland 150 77 13.7 9.3


page 128

Table 22b. Prohibited: Describing a product as “free” although it is only freely available to customers calling a premium rate phone number – by segments

QUESTION: A8_D. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]? - Describing a product as 'free' although it is only freely available to customers calling a premium rate

phone number


% Not

prohibited % DK/NA

EU27 6970 61.5 21.8 16.6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 61 22.1 16.9

50-249 employees 817 65 20.6 14.3

250+ empolyees 151 63.8 19.5 16.7



722 61.3 22.4 16.4


5692 61.1 22.2 16.7




1994 61 21.6 17.4







4098 62 21.3 16.7


Fully informed 1574 60.5 20.7 18.8

Well informed 4168 63 21.2 15.8



page 129

Table 23a. True: Upon the authorities‟ request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks posed by products which they supplied – by country

QUESTION: A9_A. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Upon the authorities' request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks posed by products which

they supplied.

Total N % Correct % Not correct % DK/NA

EU27 6970 80.9 8.3 10.7

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 76 13.1 10.9

Bulgaria 250 71 4.8 24.2

Czech Rep. 250 73.8 6 20.3

Denmark 253 72.8 8.6 18.6

Germany 401 66.3 20.5 13.2

Estonia 150 82.5 8.9 8.6

Greece 250 83.9 7.9 8.2

Spain 400 89.2 2.7 8.1

France 400 87.9 4.1 8

Ireland 200 89.9 3.6 6.5

Italy 400 89.7 2.3 8

Cyprus 150 82.4 3.6 14

Latvia 150 87.4 5.2 7.3

Lithuania 200 68.5 11.4 20.1

Luxembourg 150 84.3 5.6 10.2

Hungary 253 86.9 0.8 12.3

Malta 150 92.8 1.3 5.9

Netherlands 250 85.6 5.3 9

Austria 250 63.5 16.3 20.2

Poland 400 53.7 25.2 21.1

Portugal 257 98.6 0.4 1

Romania 250 82.6 8.4 9

Slovenia 150 83 7.1 9.9

Slovakia 250 85.7 5.1 9.2

Finland 252 80.1 9.8 10.1

Sweden 250 67.1 8.5 24.4


Norway 200 78.7 7.4 13.8

Iceland 150 72.3 13.5 14.2


page 130

Table 23b. True: Upon the authorities‟ request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks posed by products which they supplied – by segments

QUESTION: A9_A. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Upon the authorities' request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities to prevent risks posed by products which

they supplied.


EU27 6970 80.9 8.3 10.7

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 81 8.3 10.7

50-249 employees 817 80.5 8.7 10.9

250+ empolyees 151 81.1 6.6 12.3



722 82.2 7.1 10.7


5692 80.3 8.7 11




1994 81.2 8 10.8



Domestic sales only 4952 81.6 7.4 11




4098 79.2 8.4 12.4


Fully informed 1574 82.5 6.2 11.3

Well informed 4168 80.6 9.1 10.3



page 131

Table 24a. True: Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products they are selling – by country

QUESTION: A9_B. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products they are selling.


EU27 6970 77.3 13.7 9

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 64.1 24.4 11.5

Bulgaria 250 76.1 2.5 21.5

Czech Rep. 250 79.5 11.2 9.3

Denmark 253 79.2 12.5 8.3

Germany 401 48.4 38.3 13.3

Estonia 150 93.2 2.8 4

Greece 250 86.1 8.3 5.6

Spain 400 91.4 2.3 6.3

France 400 89.7 5.6 4.6

Ireland 200 88.7 5.4 5.9

Italy 400 90.6 2.7 6.7

Cyprus 150 86.3 1.2 12.5

Latvia 150 84.1 9.3 6.6

Lithuania 200 78.2 11.3 10.5

Luxembourg 150 89.2 2.8 7.9

Hungary 253 83.2 3.6 13.2

Malta 150 90.9 3.5 5.6

Netherlands 250 69.1 16 14.9

Austria 250 47.2 29.4 23.4

Poland 400 71.4 18.8 9.7

Portugal 257 99.8 0.1 0.2

Romania 250 75.2 13.3 11.5

Slovenia 150 89.4 3.8 6.9

Slovakia 250 89.8 4.6 5.6

Finland 252 90.1 5.1 4.9

Sweden 250 63.2 12.8 23.9

United Kingdom 401 89.6 6 4.4

Norway 200 82.9 9.4 7.7

Iceland 150 77.2 10 12.8


page 132

Table 24b. True: Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products they are selling – by segments

QUESTION: A9_B. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe products they are selling.


EU27 6970 77.3 13.7 9

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 77.5 13.6 8.9

50-249 employees 817 76.4 14.1 9.5

250+ empolyees 151 75.1 12.5 12.3



722 78.7 10.1 11.2


5692 76.6 14.8 8.7


Uses distance sales channels 4892 77 13.9 9.1


1994 78.8 12.7 8.5


Do distant cross border sales 1773 72.7 16.3 11





4098 76.8 13.8 9.4


Fully informed 1574 79.1 11.8 9.1

Well informed 4168 77.3 13.7 9



page 133

Table 25a. False: Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers – by country

QUESTION: A9_C. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers.


EU27 6970 86.1 7.1 6.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 68.7 22 9.3

Bulgaria 250 71.1 2 26.9

Czech Rep. 250 86.4 6.6 7

Denmark 253 90.3 5.9 3.8

Germany 401 76.7 15.1 8.2

Estonia 150 91.2 3.6 5.2

Greece 250 89.4 3.7 6.9

Spain 400 91.1 2 6.9

France 400 95.1 1.6 3.4

Ireland 200 95.6 1.7 2.8

Italy 400 91 2.8 6.2

Cyprus 150 90.1 0 9.9

Latvia 150 89.3 4.9 5.8

Lithuania 200 84.4 3.9 11.6

Luxembourg 150 90.4 2.2 7.4

Hungary 253 82.2 3.2 14.6

Malta 150 94.1 1.1 4.8


Austria 250 66 16 17.9

Poland 400 82.4 11.2 6.4

Portugal 257 99.6 0.3 0

Romania 250 93.1 2.3 4.6

Slovenia 150 93.2 1.9 5

Slovakia 250 92.1 1.7 6.2

Finland 252 85.8 8.3 5.9

Sweden 250 68.4 11.8 19.8


Norway 200 85.4 8.3 6.3

Iceland 150 88.7 8.2 3.2


page 134

Table 25b. False: Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers – by segments

QUESTION: A9_C. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers.


EU27 6970 86.1 7.1 6.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 86.3 7.1 6.6

50-249 employees 817 85.8 6.6 7.6

250+ empolyees 151 82.2 7.3 10.5



722 87.3 5.3 7.4


5692 86.1 7.5 6.5


Uses distance sales channels 4892 85.6 7.4 7


1994 87.3 6.3 6.4



Domestic sales only 4952 87 7 6


Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 85.1 8.9 6


4098 86.8 6.2 7


Fully informed 1574 86.8 5.5 7.7

Well informed 4168 86.2 7.1 6.7



page 135

Table 26a. True: Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers / importers of unsafe products – by country

QUESTION: A9_D. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers / importers of unsafe products.


EU27 6970 84 6.7 9.3

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 76.3 13 10.7

Bulgaria 250 67.2 1.7 31.2

Czech Rep. 250 85.3 4.8 9.9

Denmark 253 78.9 7.3 13.8

Germany 401 79.7 10.9 9.4

Estonia 150 86.3 5.6 8.1

Greece 250 84.6 5.7 9.8

Spain 400 89.1 2.8 8.1

France 400 87.5 7.4 5.1

Ireland 200 90.2 4.6 5.2

Italy 400 88.9 2.1 9

Cyprus 150 83.3 3.6 13.2

Latvia 150 85 4.3 10.8

Lithuania 200 75.9 7.2 16.9

Luxembourg 150 87.8 4.2 8

Hungary 253 86.7 1.6 11.8

Malta 150 91.3 2.6 6.1

Netherlands 250 71.5 12.2 16.3

Austria 250 66.6 12.3 21.1

Poland 400 80.4 9.2 10.4

Portugal 257 95.4 4.2 0.3

Romania 250 82.4 7.6 10

Slovenia 150 84.9 2.5 12.6

Slovakia 250 87.3 4 8.6

Finland 252 87.9 5.5 6.6

Sweden 250 64.9 9.7 25.3


Norway 200 82.9 5.5 11.6

Iceland 150 78.2 8.8 12.9


page 136

Table 26b. True: Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers / importers of unsafe products – by segments

QUESTION: A9_D. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or not? -

Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers / importers of unsafe products.


EU27 6970 84 6.7 9.3

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 84.4 6.8 8.8

50-249 employees 817 82.7 5.3 12

250+ empolyees 151 76.6 8.9 14.6



722 84.8 6.3 8.9


5692 83.9 6.9 9.3




1994 83.6 7.2 9.1



Domestic sales only 4952 84.1 6.9 9




4098 84.3 6.3 9.4


Fully informed 1574 85.4 4 10.6

Well informed 4168 83.5 7.2 9.2



page 137

Table 27a. Retailers who came across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months – by country

QUESTION: A10. In the past twelve months, have you come across fraudulent advertisements, statements or offers

made by your competitors?

Total N

% Yes, on several

occasions

% Yes, once or

twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 12 8 77.4 2.6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 8.7 12 76.6 2.7

Bulgaria 250 22.1 6.8 62.1 9

Czech Rep. 250 17.7 12.3 65.6 4.4

Denmark 253 16.4 6.1 77 0.5

Germany 401 12.9 6.9 79.2 0.9

Estonia 150 22.5 6.1 67.9 3.5

Greece 250 29 14.8 52 4.2

Spain 400 16.9 9.9 70.9 2.3

France 400 4.5 4.9 88.7 2

Ireland 200 7.9 7.3 83.3 1.6

Italy 400 11.5 9.1 75.3 4.1

Cyprus 150 22.4 17.6 57.4 2.7

Latvia 150 13.4 8.3 70.5 7.8

Lithuania 200 34.2 11.8 46.4 7.7

Luxembourg 150 7.8 7.6 83.2 1.4

Hungary 253 18.2 10.1 59.4 12.2

Malta 150 8.4 24.8 64.6 2.2

Netherlands 250 7.3 4.7 83.9 4.1

Austria 250 7.6 6.3 84.2 1.8

Poland 400 18.3 13.3 66.7 1.7

Portugal 257 13.3 15.9 66.8 4

Romania 250 22.3 11.1 63.6 3

Slovenia 150 14.4 19.4 63.3 2.9

Slovakia 250 16.3 14.3 66.9 2.5

Finland 252 12.7 8.8 77.7 0.8

Sweden 250 9.1 7.2 81.8 1.9

United Kingdom 401 5.4 4.7 88.1 1.7

Norway 200 18.2 5.5 74.8 1.5

Iceland 150 16 15.6 67.5 0.9


page 138

Table 27b. Retailers who came across fraudulent advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months – by segments

QUESTION: A10. In the past twelve months, have you come across fraudulent advertisements, statements or offers

made by your competitors?

Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes, once

or twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 12 8 77.4 2.6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 12.2 7.6 77.7 2.4

50-249 employees 817 11.4 10.2 75.2 3.1

250+ empolyees 151 8.3 8.7 76.7 6.2



722 13.5 9.1 74.5 2.9


5692 12 7.8 77.8 2.4




1994 13.2 7.2 76.8 2.8


Do distant cross border sales 1773 12.8 9.1 75.9 2.1





4098 10.5 7.9 79.2 2.5


Fully informed 1574 12.4 9.8 74.1 3.7

Well informed 4168 13 7.5 77.3 2.2

Less than well informed 1149 8.7 7.5 81.8 2.1


page 139

Table 28a. Retailers who came across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months – by country

QUESTION: A11. In the past twelve months, have you come across misleading or deceptive advertisements,

statements or offers made by your competitors?

Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes, once or

twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 15.9 12.5 69.9 1.7

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 7.5 13.6 77.5 1.4

Bulgaria 250 26.1 15.9 50.8 7.2

Czech Rep. 250 22.7 19.6 52.2 5.5

Denmark 253 19.5 8.8 71.1 0.7

Germany 401 16.2 11.8 71.4 0.6

Estonia 150 25.8 16.4 56 1.7

Greece 250 37 18.9 41.7 2.5

Spain 400 19.4 11.5 68.5 0.6

France 400 5.2 6.7 86.7 1.3

Ireland 200 11.8 13.9 72.6 1.6

Italy 400 16.6 13.3 67.7 2.4

Cyprus 150 16.2 23 58.4 2.3

Latvia 150 10.6 10 75.5 3.8

Lithuania 200 32.2 18.9 41.6 7.4

Luxembourg 150 7.8 8.7 82.8 0.7

Hungary 253 24 19.3 52.5 4.2

Malta 150 15.9 21.3 61.8 1

Netherlands 250 14.4 11.1 72.9 1.7

Austria 250 13.7 13.8 69.4 3.1

Poland 400 24.5 14 58.9 2.6

Portugal 257 15.1 25.3 59 0.7

Romania 250 25.4 12.1 59 3.5

Slovenia 150 27.9 21.5 49.4 1.2

Slovakia 250 18 18.8 59.1 4.1

Finland 252 13.8 12.1 73 1.1

Sweden 250 14.3 18.9 64.5 2.3

United Kingdom 401 12 10.9 75.6 1.5

Norway 200 25.4 9.9 63.8 0.9

Iceland 150 25.9 30.7 42.9 0.4


page 140

Table 28b. Retailers who came across misleading or deceptive advertisements or offers made by competitors in the past 12 months – by segments

QUESTION: A11. In the past twelve months, have you come across misleading or deceptive advertisements,


Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes,

once or

twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 15.9 12.5 69.9 1.7

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 15.8 12 70.5 1.6

50-249 employees 817 16.7 14.9 65.7 2.6

250+ empolyees 151 14.4 16.4 65.9 3.3



722 17.9 11.9 68.9 1.4


5692 15.9 12.5 69.9 1.8




1994 13.8 12.3 72.3 1.6







4098 13.5 12 73 1.5


Fully informed 1574 17.4 12 67.8 2.9

Well informed 4168 16 12.6 70.2 1.2



page 141

Table 29a. Awareness that competitors knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months – by country

QUESTION: A12. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors knowingly sold any unsafe

products?

Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes, once

or twice % No

% Not relevant

because I don't

sell products % DK/NA

EU27 6970 3.4 2.6 73.1 16.1 4.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 4.4 7 71.3 8.3 9

Bulgaria 250 5.3 2.8 49 26.7 16.2

Czech Rep. 250 2.3 0.7 72.5 19.5 5

Denmark 253 1.8 1.3 89.1 7.1 0.7

Germany 401 4.7 0.8 82.7 10.4 1.4

Estonia 150 1.8 1.3 67.5 25.8 3.6

Greece 250 7.9 8.8 54.4 16.5 12.4

Spain 400 2.3 3 67.4 19.9 7.3

France 400 1.9 2.3 67.8 27.1 1

Ireland 200 0.8 2.4 88.4 5.1 3.3

Italy 400 3.1 2.7 65 18.2 11

Cyprus 150 9.1 7 61 9.7 13.2

Latvia 150 1.8 5.8 65.6 24.7 2.1

Lithuania 200 7.1 0.6 64.5 18.4 9.4

Luxembourg 150 1.4 2 52.5 42.4 1.7

Hungary 253 3.3 2.4 60 25.8 8.5

Malta 150 2.2 2.9 66.6 17.4 10.8

Netherlands 250 4.6 6.5 71.1 10.6 7.2

Austria 250 9.4 6.3 72.2 8.5 3.7

Poland 400 4.8 3.7 69.7 17.3 4.4

Portugal 257 4.7 11.3 74.8 8.1 1.2

Romania 250 9.7 7.4 60.6 7.3 15.1

Slovenia 150 1 0.3 66.2 27.5 5

Slovakia 250 1.5 3.7 73.3 14.8 6.7

Finland 252 1.3 2.3 62.9 33 0.6

Sweden 250 1.2 0.6 53.9 42 2.2

United Kingdom 401 0.6 0.3 85.3 11.2 2.5

Norway 200 7 3.5 80.3 5.5 3.6

Iceland 150 6.7 5.1 80.6 7 0.6


page 142

Table 29b. Awareness that competitors knowingly sold unsafe products in the past 12 months – by segments

QUESTION: A12. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors knowingly sold any unsafe

products?

Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes,

once or

twice % No

% Not

relevant

because I

don't sell

products

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 3.4 2.6 73.1 16.1 4.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 3.4 2.7 73.4 15.4 5

50-249 employees 817 3.1 1.8 71.3 20.6 3.2

250+ empolyees 151 3 3.2 67.7 21.3 4.9



722 3.5 2.8 71.1 18.6 4.1


5692 3.5 2.6 74.2 15.3 4.5




1994 2.8 3.3 77.9 8.6 7.3


Do distant cross border sales 1773 3.4 1.8 74.4 17.4 3

Domestic sales only 4952 3.3 3 72.8 15.4 5.4




4098 3.3 3 72.7 15.9 5.1


Fully informed 1574 3.7 3.6 68.5 19.3 4.9

Well informed 4168 3.7 2.2 73.7 15.5 4.9

Less than well informed 1149 1.8 3.1 77 14.4 3.6


page 143

Table 30a. Awareness that competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers in the past 12 months – by country

QUESTION: A13. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors tried to unduly coerce or

pressurise consumers to purchase something or sign up to a contract?

Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes, once or

twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 6.7 5.9 81.5 5.9

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 7.7 10.8 76.3 5.1

Bulgaria 250 8.2 6.2 69 16.7

Czech Rep. 250 5.7 8.5 76.6 9.2

Denmark 253 8.1 8.2 79.8 3.8

Germany 401 7.4 3.8 86.2 2.6

Estonia 150 9.1 8.1 76.7 6.1

Greece 250 14.1 11.3 58.4 16.2

Spain 400 5.9 5.7 81.2 7.2

France 400 8.3 5.1 81.4 5.2

Ireland 200 5.1 4.6 86.7 3.7

Italy 400 3.9 5.5 82.5 8.1

Cyprus 150 4.3 8.7 74.1 12.9

Latvia 150 0.6 4.3 86 9

Lithuania 200 10.9 5.8 71.4 11.9

Luxembourg 150 13.6 5.4 79 2

Hungary 253 7.3 8.6 73.4 10.8

Malta 150 8.2 8 76.3 7.5

Netherlands 250 8.6 7.8 77.7 5.9

Austria 250 6 10.2 79.4 4.4

Poland 400 16.9 9.4 66.9 6.8

Portugal 257 5.3 11.5 79.3 3.9

Romania 250 7.7 5.6 75.1 11.6

Slovenia 150 13.9 8.9 72.7 4.4

Slovakia 250 3.3 10.6 78.9 7.2

Finland 252 3.3 4.6 91.5 0.6

Sweden 250 4.7 3.9 85.7 5.7

United Kingdom 401 4 4.5 87.1 4.4

Norway 200 12 5.8 78.4 3.9

Iceland 150 8.9 12.8 76.1 2.3


page 144

Table 30b. Awareness that competitors tried to unduly coerce or pressurise consumers in the past 12 months – by segments

QUESTION: A13. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors tried to unduly coerce or


Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes, once

or twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 6.7 5.9 81.5 5.9

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 6.6 5.9 81.5 6

50-249 employees 817 7.8 5.6 81.3 5.3

250+ empolyees 151 8 7 79.3 5.7



722 8.8 5.7 80.7 4.8


5692 6.5 5.9 81.6 6


Uses distance sales channels 4892 7.3 6.1 81.5 5


1994 5.3 5.4 81.3 8





Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 7.9 6.4 81 4.7


4098 6.2 5.9 81.5 6.4


Fully informed 1574 7.3 6 80 6.6

Well informed 4168 7 6 81.5 5.5



page 145

Table 31a. Awareness that competitors used unfair consumer contract terms in the past 12 months – by country

QUESTION: A14. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors used what you regard as unfair

consumer contract terms?

Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes, once or

twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 7.4 6.4 78.9 7.3

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 6.6 8.7 78.1 6.6

Bulgaria 250 13.3 7.3 63.8 15.5

Czech Rep. 250 9.7 14.8 61.9 13.7

Denmark 253 6.6 8.7 82.4 2.3

Germany 401 8.5 5.2 82.8 3.5

Estonia 150 16.6 3.7 70 9.7

Greece 250 15.4 11.1 55.4 18.2

Spain 400 4.9 6.4 78.7 10

France 400 6 4.1 85.5 4.4

Ireland 200 3.1 3.2 88.7 5

Italy 400 5.7 6.2 78.3 9.8

Cyprus 150 3.9 14.1 66.3 15.7

Latvia 150 1.8 3.8 83.7 10.6

Lithuania 200 16.9 6.3 66.1 10.7

Luxembourg 150 6.5 5.7 81 6.8

Hungary 253 11.2 11.7 65.9 11.2

Malta 150 4.2 6.1 73.1 16.5

Netherlands 250 8.6 6 80.1 5.3

Austria 250 10.4 10.7 76.4 2.6

Poland 400 27.1 11.8 54.6 6.5

Portugal 257 8.5 9.6 73.9 8

Romania 250 8.4 4.3 73.6 13.7

Slovenia 150 15.8 15.4 62.7 6

Slovakia 250 7.9 10.6 73.4 8.2

Finland 252 4.2 5.5 89.1 1.2

Sweden 250 2.8 3.9 81.9 11.3

United Kingdom 401 2.6 5.3 84.6 7.4

Norway 200 4.6 2.4 89.8 3.2

Iceland 150 10.2 8.8 76.3 4.6


page 146

Table 31b. Awareness that competitors used unfair consumer contract terms in the past 12 months – by segments

QUESTION: A14. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors used what you regard as unfair

consumer contract terms?

Total N

% Yes, on

several

occasions

% Yes,

once or

twice % No % DK/NA

EU27 6970 7.4 6.4 78.9 7.3

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 7.1 6.2 79.3 7.3

50-249 employees 817 8.8 7.8 76.5 6.9

250+ empolyees 151 8.4 7.5 74.3 9.8



722 7.7 7.5 76.2 8.6


5692 7.4 6.4 79.1 7.1


Uses distance sales channels 4892 8 6.8 78.6 6.6


1994 6 5.4 79.5 9.2







4098 6.9 6 79.7 7.4


Fully informed 1574 8.8 7.6 77.2 6.4

Well informed 4168 7.7 6.2 78.8 7.4



page 147

Table 32a. Compliance with consumer legislation – respondents – by country

QUESTION: A15_A. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please say

whether you strongly agree - agree - disagree - strongly disagree with the following statements. - You comply with

consumer legislation.

Total N

% Strongly

agree % Agree % Disagree

% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 70.1 28.9 0.3 0.1 0.6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 60 36 2.1 0.3 1.6

Bulgaria 250 58.8 38.3 1.7 0 1.1

Czech Rep. 250 70.6 25.3 1.5 0 2.6

Denmark 253 59 38.9 1.4 0 0.7

Germany 401 77.6 22.2 0 0 0.3

Estonia 150 70.1 28.8 0 0 1.1

Greece 250 69.8 28.6 0.7 0.5 0.5

Spain 400 79.9 20 0 0 0.1

France 400 71.6 27.6 0 0.7 0.1

Ireland 200 70.6 27.8 0.4 0.5 0.7

Italy 400 63.2 36.8 0 0 0

Cyprus 150 64.2 35.2 0 0 0.6

Latvia 150 41.5 58.4 0.1 0 0

Lithuania 200 57.6 39 1.7 0 1.8

Luxembourg 150 65.9 33.5 0 0.6 0

Hungary 253 73.1 25.8 0.3 0 0.8

Malta 150 56.1 42.2 0.6 0 1.1

Netherlands 250 37.6 60.9 0 0 1.5

Austria 250 83.7 16.3 0 0 0

Poland 400 54.6 42.8 0.7 0 1.9

Portugal 257 73 27 0 0 0

Romania 250 47.7 48 2.9 0.4 0.9

Slovenia 150 59.4 39.3 1.4 0 0

Slovakia 250 57.6 42 0 0 0.4

Finland 252 86 10.8 0.4 0.6 2.2

Sweden 250 78.9 20 0.3 0 0.8

United Kingdom 401 73.6 25 0.2 0 1.2

Norway 200 81.5 18 0 0 0.4

Iceland 150 53.3 45 0.6 0 1.1


page 148

Table 32b. Compliance with consumer legislation – respondents – by segments

QUESTION: A15_A. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please say

whether you strongly agree - agree - disagree - strongly disagree with the following statements. - You comply with

consumer legislation.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 70.1 28.9 0.3 0.1 0.6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 69 30.1 0.3 0.1 0.5

50-249 employees 817 76.7 21.4 0.5 0.1 1.1

250+ empolyees 151 75.9 23 0.3 0.1 0.8



722 71.7 26.8 0.3 0.1 1.1


5692 70 29 0.3 0.1 0.5


Uses distance sales channels 4892 69.9 29 0.3 0.1 0.7


1994 71 28.4 0.4 0.1 0.2



Domestic sales only 4952 70.2 28.9 0.3 0 0.6


Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 75.8 23.4 0.2 0 0.5


4098 66.5 32.3 0.4 0.1 0.6


Fully informed 1574 80.4 18.8 0.1 0.1 0.6

Well informed 4168 69.5 29.8 0.3 0 0.4

Less than well informed 1149 58.2 39.6 0.7 0.4 1


page 149

Table 33a. Compliance with consumer legislation – competitors of respondents – by country

QUESTION: A15_B. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please say

whether you strongly agree - agree - disagree - strongly disagree with the following statements. - Your competitors

comply with consumer legislation.

Total N

% Strongly


% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 26.7 42.9 8.2 0.9 21.3

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 38 47.6 7 1.9 5.4

Bulgaria 250 8.3 21.3 14.4 2.3 53.7

Czech Rep. 250 32.3 30.6 4.5 0 32.6

Denmark 253 18.7 51.9 13.4 2.3 13.7

Germany 401 24.3 48.2 11.4 0.4 15.6

Estonia 150 22.3 44.5 11.3 0 21.9

Greece 250 20.8 42.4 11.2 4.2 21.4

Spain 400 25.4 37.9 9.7 0.2 26.8

France 400 45.6 36 3.4 0 15.1

Ireland 200 32.5 46.2 3 1.2 17.1

Italy 400 16.2 44.1 9.8 1.4 28.4

Cyprus 150 12 43 9.6 0.1 35.2

Latvia 150 6.4 47.2 6.4 0 40

Lithuania 200 9 42.2 11.4 1.9 35.4

Luxembourg 150 32.5 44 7.2 0 16.3

Hungary 253 21.5 37 12.5 0.9 28.1

Malta 150 21 43.5 11.7 2.9 20.8

Netherlands 250 14.7 62.1 8.4 1 13.8

Austria 250 35 43.3 6.6 1.3 13.8

Poland 400 7.5 52.3 14.5 0.9 24.8

Portugal 257 15.6 42.8 11.5 0 30.1

Romania 250 12.4 40.1 8.2 0.6 38.8

Slovenia 150 12.5 55 17.8 1.4 13.3

Slovakia 250 11.8 53.6 4.1 0 30.5

Finland 252 56.6 31 6 0.6 5.8

Sweden 250 40.3 36.2 7.5 0.9 15.1

United Kingdom 401 33.9 41.1 3.3 1.9 20

Norway 200 33.2 46.7 4.4 1.9 13.8

Iceland 150 18.1 63.5 6.9 1.9 9.7


page 150

Table 33b. Compliance with consumer legislation – competitors of respondents – by segments

QUESTION: A15_B. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please say

whether you strongly agree - agree - disagree - strongly disagree with the following statements. - Your competitors

comply with consumer legislation.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 26.7 42.9 8.2 0.9 21.3

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 26.1 42.7 8.3 1 21.9

50-249 employees 817 29.6 44.4 8 0.6 17.5

250+ empolyees 151 33.1 40.1 8.2 0.7 17.9



722 29.1 44.6 7 0.6 18.6


5692 26.1 42.9 8.4 1 21.6




1994 27.7 39.8 8.1 0.8 23.6


Do distant cross border sales 1773 26.7 44 9 0.4 19.9





4098 24.9 42.5 8.2 0.8 23.5


Fully informed 1574 32.7 41.5 6.6 1 18.3

Well informed 4168 25.6 42.8 9.3 1.1 21.2

Less than well informed 1149 22.9 45.6 7 0.4 24.1


page 151

Table 34a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your national sales – by country

QUESTION: A16_A. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 15.9 69.1 15

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 35.6 51.8 12.5

Bulgaria 250 37.5 53 9.5

Czech Rep. 250 25.2 61.9 12.9

Denmark 253 14.5 65.7 19.8

Germany 401 9.1 62.7 28.3

Estonia 150 33.1 66.1 0.8

Greece 250 14.4 78.8 6.8

Spain 400 23 63.7 13.3

France 400 16.8 72.2 11

Ireland 200 6.1 88.4 5.5

Italy 400 13 71.6 15.5

Cyprus 150 22.4 69.1 8.5

Latvia 150 23.4 70 6.6

Lithuania 200 16.3 72.4 11.3

Luxembourg 150 10.8 79.1 10.1

Hungary 253 48.5 38.7 12.8

Malta 150 20.4 74.1 5.5

Netherlands 250 13 71.1 16

Austria 250 11.8 81.1 7.1

Poland 400 18.3 75.5 6.2

Portugal 257 12.1 83.6 4.3

Romania 250 48.2 44.4 7.4

Slovenia 150 18 81.4 0.6

Slovakia 250 35.3 49.6 15.1

Finland 252 4.7 81.3 14

Sweden 250 9.3 62.6 28.1


Norway 200 15.6 79.1 5.3

Iceland 150 25.6 64.9 9.5


page 152

Table 34b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your national sales – by segments

QUESTION: A16_A. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 15.9 69.1 15

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 15.6 69.7 14.7

50-249 employees 817 17.4 68.2 14.4

250+ empolyees 151 19.6 53.5 26.8



722 19.5 68.4 12.1


5692 14.8 70.1 15.1


Uses distance sales channels 4892 13.9 70.2 16


1994 21 67.2 11.8







4098 14.6 72.2 13.2


Fully informed 1574 20.5 64.3 15.2

Well informed 4168 15.7 69.5 14.7



page 153

Table 35a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales – by country

QUESTION: A16_B1. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales

Base : retailers in all countries excluding Germany and Austria


EU27 5439 14.7 73.8 11.5

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 13.3 74.2 12.5

Bulgaria 250 36.2 53.3 10.5

Czech Rep. 250 13.2 73.9 12.9

Denmark 253 13.2 71.8 14.9

Germany 0 0 0 0

Estonia 150 20.2 77 2.8

Greece 250 14.3 79.2 6.5

Spain 400 19.7 65.6 14.7

France 400 17.5 72 10.5

Ireland 200 4.7 90.7 4.7

Italy 400 10.8 73.9 15.3

Cyprus 150 22.9 66.6 10.5

Latvia 150 9.6 84.2 6.2

Lithuania 200 21.7 67.9 10.4

Luxembourg 150 13.3 76.6 10.1

Hungary 253 29.2 58.2 12.6

Malta 150 15.7 78.7 5.5

Netherlands 250 11.5 74.2 14.3

Austria 0 0 0 0

Poland 400 12.8 81.5 5.7

Portugal 257 11.6 84 4.4

Romania 250 49.4 43.6 6.9

Slovenia 150 15.5 81.9 2.5

Slovakia 250 29.4 55.1 15.5

Finland 252 0 84.7 15.3

Sweden 250 9 63.6 27.3


Norway 200 14.9 78.9 6.1

Iceland 150 13.5 78.2 8.3


page 154

Table 35b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales – by segments


You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales



EU27 5439 14.7 73.8 11.5

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 4680 14.4 74.5 11.1

50-249 employees 638 16.1 72.3 11.7

250+ empolyees 119 18.7 57.1 24.2



626 15.8 73.1 11.2


4292 14.1 75 10.8




1601 19.7 71.3 9



Domestic sales only 3975 16 73.1 10.9




3266 14.3 75.2 10.5



Well informed 3170 14.5 74.2 11.3



page 155

Table 36a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales – by country


You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the context of a specific control

concerning your national sales

Base : retailers in Germany and Austria


EU27 1531 8.2 66.3 25.5

COUNTRY

Belgium 0 0 0 0

Bulgaria 0 0 0 0

Czech Rep. 0 0 0 0

Denmark 0 0 0 0

Germany 401 8.6 63.6 27.8

Estonia 0 0 0 0

Greece 0 0 0 0

Spain 0 0 0 0

France 0 0 0 0

Ireland 0 0 0 0

Italy 0 0 0 0

Cyprus 0 0 0 0

Latvia 0 0 0 0

Lithuania 0 0 0 0

Luxembourg 0 0 0 0

Hungary 0 0 0 0

Malta 0 0 0 0

Netherlands 0 0 0 0

Austria 250 5.3 88.1 6.6

Poland 0 0 0 0

Portugal 0 0 0 0

Romania 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 0 0 0 0

Slovakia 0 0 0 0

Finland 0 0 0 0

Sweden 0 0 0 0

United Kingdom 0 0 0 0

Norway 0 0 0 0

Iceland 0 0 0 0


page 156

Table 36b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the context of a specific control concerning your national sales – by segments



concerning your national sales



EU27 1531 8.2 66.3 25.5

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 1314 8.5 65.8 25.7

50-249 employees 180 7.1 70.6 22.3

250+ empolyees 32 5.8 61.1 33.1



96 20.3 68.8 10.9


1401 7.4 65.6 27


Uses distance sales channels 1107 7 67 26.1


393 11.9 65.8 22.3







831 7.4 71.8 20.8


Fully informed 291 11.3 56.2 32.5

Well informed 997 7 69.4 23.6



page 157

Table 37a. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities – by country

QUESTION: A16_C1. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities



EU27 5439 12.2 39.6 48.2

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 18.9 49.3 31.7

Bulgaria 250 14.4 19.9 65.7

Czech Rep. 250 8.7 17 74.4

Denmark 253 25.3 34.7 40

Germany 0 0 0 0

Estonia 150 21.5 35.6 42.9

Greece 250 19.9 30 50.1

Spain 400 9.7 33.8 56.6

France 400 13.1 33.6 53.3

Ireland 200 8.5 57.2 34.4

Italy 400 5.3 38.4 56.3

Cyprus 150 12.5 28.1 59.4

Latvia 150 7.7 22.5 69.8

Lithuania 200 14.6 36.9 48.5

Luxembourg 150 6.8 37.7 55.5

Hungary 253 30.5 19.1 50.5

Malta 150 11.1 38.6 50.3

Netherlands 250 24.1 39.8 36.1

Austria 0 0 0 0

Poland 400 9.5 33.3 57.2

Portugal 257 10.3 26.2 63.4

Romania 250 22.9 23.8 53.4

Slovenia 150 18.3 32.8 48.8

Slovakia 250 15.2 26.5 58.3

Finland 252 13.5 56.4 30.1

Sweden 250 12.4 27.9 59.7


Norway 200 17.3 30.9 51.8

Iceland 150 18.4 54.9 26.7


page 158

Table 37b. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities – by segments


One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities



EU27 5439 12.2 39.6 48.2

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 4680 11.3 40.3 48.3

50-249 employees 638 17.4 36.2 46.4

250+ empolyees 119 16.8 29.4 53.8



626 11.2 36.8 52


4292 12.2 40 47.8




1601 13.6 35.3 51.1







3266 9.3 38.3 52.4


Fully informed 1283 17.2 37.8 45

Well informed 3170 11.5 38.8 49.7



page 159

Table 38a. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations – by country


One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations



EU27 1531 10.3 25 64.7

COUNTRY

Belgium 0 0 0 0

Bulgaria 0 0 0 0

Czech Rep. 0 0 0 0

Denmark 0 0 0 0

Germany 401 10 24.5 65.5

Estonia 0 0 0 0

Greece 0 0 0 0

Spain 0 0 0 0

France 0 0 0 0

Ireland 0 0 0 0

Italy 0 0 0 0

Cyprus 0 0 0 0

Latvia 0 0 0 0

Lithuania 0 0 0 0

Luxembourg 0 0 0 0

Hungary 0 0 0 0

Malta 0 0 0 0

Netherlands 0 0 0 0

Austria 250 12.8 29 58.2

Poland 0 0 0 0

Portugal 0 0 0 0

Romania 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 0 0 0 0

Slovakia 0 0 0 0

Finland 0 0 0 0

Sweden 0 0 0 0


Norway 0 0 0 0

Iceland 0 0 0 0


page 160

Table 38b. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations – by segments


One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations



EU27 1531 10.3 25 64.7

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 1314 9.8 25.4 64.8

50-249 employees 180 13.3 20.6 66

250+ empolyees 32 11.1 33.5 55.5



96 20.3 22.1 57.6


1401 9.7 24.6 65.6




393 14.6 27.5 57.9







831 9.6 29.6 60.7


Fully informed 291 12.8 21.4 65.8

Well informed 997 10.5 28.3 61.2



page 161

Table 39a. You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider you are breaching consumer legislation – by country

QUESTION: A16_D. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider you are

breaching consumer legislation


EU27 6970 4 83 13

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 14.4 67.9 17.6

Bulgaria 250 7.1 76.5 16.4

Czech Rep. 250 10.7 74.9 14.4

Denmark 253 5.6 87.5 6.9

Germany 401 1.8 70.3 27.9

Estonia 150 14.3 81.6 4.2

Greece 250 3.1 93.9 3

Spain 400 4.1 85.8 10.1

France 400 1.9 86.3 11.8

Ireland 200 0.9 94.5 4.6

Italy 400 2.5 83.2 14.3

Cyprus 150 6.9 90.7 2.3

Latvia 150 6.6 92.6 0.9

Lithuania 200 7.9 78.9 13.2

Luxembourg 150 3.4 85.5 11.2

Hungary 253 21.2 65.8 13

Malta 150 3.6 90.6 5.8

Netherlands 250 4.1 83.4 12.6

Austria 250 4.9 89.8 5.3

Poland 400 4.4 87.9 7.7

Portugal 257 1.9 94.7 3.4

Romania 250 14.8 79.8 5.4

Slovenia 150 6.8 89.8 3.4

Slovakia 250 11 66.9 22.1

Finland 252 1.9 91.1 7

Sweden 250 2.6 83.9 13.5

United Kingdom 401 2.2 93.9 4

Norway 200 8.4 88.1 3.5

Iceland 150 5.7 93.1 1.2


page 162

Table 39b. You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider you are breaching consumer legislation – by segments

QUESTION: A16_D. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider you are

breaching consumer legislation


EU27 6970 4 83 13

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 3.7 83.2 13.1

50-249 employees 817 5.4 83.8 10.8

250+ empolyees 151 8.1 71.5 20.4



722 6.2 83.1 10.7


5692 3.6 83.1 13.3




1994 5.3 82.9 11.8


Do distant cross border sales 1773 4 87.3 8.6





4098 3.3 85 11.7


Fully informed 1574 5.4 81.5 13.2

Well informed 4168 4.1 82.8 13.2

Less than well informed 1149 2.3 86.7 11


page 163

Table 40a. One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider your competitors are breaching consumer legislation – by country

QUESTION: A16_E. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they

consider your competitors are breaching consumer legislation


EU27 6970 6.3 47.5 46.2

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 19.5 55.6 24.9

Bulgaria 250 4.1 29 67

Czech Rep. 250 9.4 27.3 63.3

Denmark 253 13.4 50.5 36.1

Germany 401 6.3 34.1 59.6

Estonia 150 8.9 59.4 31.7

Greece 250 10.9 44.3 44.7

Spain 400 5.5 44.6 49.9

France 400 2.8 49.2 48

Ireland 200 3.8 75.1 21

Italy 400 2.7 47.2 50.1

Cyprus 150 8.2 34.2 57.6

Latvia 150 3.2 34.2 62.6

Lithuania 200 4.7 49.5 45.8

Luxembourg 150 4.5 45.7 49.9

Hungary 253 13.3 29.7 57

Malta 150 4.7 49.6 45.7

Netherlands 250 11.9 56.8 31.3

Austria 250 12.1 36 51.9

Poland 400 5.5 42.8 51.7

Portugal 257 6.2 25.1 68.7

Romania 250 7.8 33.5 58.7

Slovenia 150 4.6 42.8 52.6

Slovakia 250 6.8 44 49.2

Finland 252 7.8 70.6 21.6

Sweden 250 7.7 33.2 59.2


Norway 200 15.6 42 42.4

Iceland 150 8.2 66.5 25.3


page 164

Table 40b. One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they consider your competitors are breaching consumer legislation – by segments

QUESTION: A16_E. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer organisations) that they

consider your competitors are breaching consumer legislation


EU27 6970 6.3 47.5 46.2

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 5.9 47.7 46.4

50-249 employees 817 8.2 47.9 43.8

250+ empolyees 151 11.4 37.9 50.7



722 7.4 50.5 42.1


5692 6 46.8 47.2




1994 5.2 46.3 48.5







4098 4.7 47.3 48


Fully informed 1574 9.1 48.5 42.5

Well informed 4168 6.2 45.6 48.2



page 165

Table 41a. You have been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not respecting the agreed codes of conduct / codes of practice – by country

QUESTION: A16_F. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 2.5 86.4 11

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 18 72.1 9.8

Bulgaria 250 5.2 84.8 9.9

Czech Rep. 250 5.3 84.4 10.2

Denmark 253 3.2 89.2 7.6

Germany 401 0.4 74.1 25.4

Estonia 150 2.8 92.2 4.9

Greece 250 0.3 98 1.8

Spain 400 3.7 87.8 8.4

France 400 1.5 88.8 9.7

Ireland 200 1.7 94.2 4.1

Italy 400 1.4 87.1 11.6

Cyprus 150 1.5 94 4.5

Latvia 150 1.8 97.5 0.8

Lithuania 200 0 94.3 5.7

Luxembourg 150 0.5 89 10.6

Hungary 253 5.4 81.4 13.2

Malta 150 1.6 94.5 3.9

Netherlands 250 4.4 85.4 10.2

Austria 250 0.4 91 8.6

Poland 400 0.9 95.9 3.2

Portugal 257 0.6 95.9 3.5

Romania 250 16.9 79.9 3.1

Slovenia 150 2.4 97.6 0

Slovakia 250 5.4 76.8 17.8

Finland 252 0 93.7 6.3

Sweden 250 0 87.9 12.1


Norway 200 1.6 95.1 3.4

Iceland 150 1.4 97.1 1.4


page 166

Table 41b. You have been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not respecting the agreed codes of conduct / codes of practice – by segments

QUESTION: A16_F. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 2.5 86.4 11

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 2.4 86.6 11

50-249 employees 817 3.3 86.7 10

250+ empolyees 151 3.4 80.7 16



722 3.7 88.3 8


5692 2.2 86.4 11.4




1994 2.7 87.6 9.6







4098 2.1 88.3 9.6


Fully informed 1574 3.5 85.3 11.2

Well informed 4168 2.5 86.8 10.7



page 167

Table 42a. You have learned through the media about a breach of consumer legislation in your market – by country

QUESTION: A16_G. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 20.9 67.5 11.6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 28 61.1 10.9

Bulgaria 250 27.8 56.7 15.5

Czech Rep. 250 28.7 57.2 14.1

Denmark 253 40.4 56.2 3.4

Germany 401 11 64.9 24.1

Estonia 150 40.9 57 2.1

Greece 250 44.1 53 2.9

Spain 400 20.8 67.8 11.5

France 400 16 73.5 10.5

Ireland 200 27 68.9 4.1

Italy 400 23.2 64 12.8

Cyprus 150 24 75 1.1

Latvia 150 18.3 77.6 4.1

Lithuania 200 24.5 66.9 8.6

Luxembourg 150 12.3 78.9 8.8

Hungary 253 20.4 62.8 16.9

Malta 150 21.6 76.1 2.3

Netherlands 250 16.3 75.4 8.3

Austria 250 20.9 74.4 4.7

Poland 400 25 69.9 5.1

Portugal 257 19.3 71 9.7

Romania 250 37.6 57.8 4.6

Slovenia 150 33.2 65.9 0.8

Slovakia 250 14.5 67.2 18.3

Finland 252 22.5 71.5 6.1

Sweden 250 25.4 58.1 16.5


Norway 200 44 53 3

Iceland 150 30.4 66.7 2.9


page 168

Table 42b. You have learned through the media about a breach of consumer legislation in your market – by segments

QUESTION: A16_G. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 20.9 67.5 11.6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 20.3 67.8 11.9

50-249 employees 817 24.8 66.6 8.5

250+ empolyees 151 21.1 62.8 16.1



722 24.7 67.2 8.1


5692 20.3 67.7 12.1




1994 19.5 69.6 10.9







4098 18.1 71.3 10.6


Fully informed 1574 26.8 61.5 11.7

Well informed 4168 20.6 67.8 11.6



page 169

Table 43a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your cross-border sales – by country

QUESTION: A16_H. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your cross-border

sales


EU27 6970 2 57.8 40.3

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 18.3 60.5 21.2

Bulgaria 250 0.9 41.4 57.7

Czech Rep. 250 9.4 62.4 28.2

Denmark 253 1 80.4 18.6

Germany 401 0.3 54.9 44.8

Estonia 150 1.3 84.6 14.1

Greece 250 1.4 53.2 45.3

Spain 400 2.1 43.1 54.8

France 400 0.9 46.9 52.2

Ireland 200 2.6 85.1 12.3

Italy 400 0.8 71.2 27.9

Cyprus 150 8.7 68.1 23.2

Latvia 150 1.6 22 76.4

Lithuania 200 1.3 67.7 31

Luxembourg 150 3.5 63.4 33.1

Hungary 253 2.3 55.8 41.9

Malta 150 1.1 75.5 23.4

Netherlands 250 2.7 57.6 39.6

Austria 250 0.4 73.6 26

Poland 400 1.2 53.3 45.6

Portugal 257 1 37.4 61.6

Romania 250 4.5 47.9 47.5

Slovenia 150 0.5 82.5 17

Slovakia 250 5 55.2 39.8

Finland 252 0.4 53.4 46.2

Sweden 250 0 23.2 76.8


Norway 200 1.5 53.4 45

Iceland 150 1.7 80.7 17.6


page 170

Table 43b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your cross-border sales – by segments

QUESTION: A16_H. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a general control concerning your cross-border

sales


EU27 6970 2 57.8 40.3

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 1.8 57.4 40.8

50-249 employees 817 3.2 60.9 35.9

250+ empolyees 151 2.9 56 41.2



722 4.5 71.7 23.8


5692 1.5 56 42.5




1994 1.5 49 49.5







4098 1.3 56.8 41.9


Fully informed 1574 3 59.5 37.5

Well informed 4168 1.9 56.4 41.7



page 171

Table 44a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales – by country

QUESTION: A16_I1. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -

You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales



EU27 5439 2.2 58 39.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 16.5 62.2 21.3

Bulgaria 250 1.2 41.2 57.6

Czech Rep. 250 7 64.3 28.7

Denmark 253 1.7 79.3 19.1

Germany 0 0 0 0

Estonia 150 1.2 84.6 14.2

Greece 250 0.5 55 44.5

Spain 400 2.3 41.7 55.9

France 400 0.5 47.5 51.9

Ireland 200 2.4 85.1 12.6

Italy 400 0.8 70 29.1

Cyprus 150 6.3 70.2 23.5

Latvia 150 0.8 22.3 76.9

Lithuania 200 6.1 62 31.8

Luxembourg 150 3.8 63.4 32.8

Hungary 253 1.5 57.1 41.4

Malta 150 1.4 74.6 24

Netherlands 250 2.4 56 41.5

Austria 0 0 0 0

Poland 400 1 53.4 45.6

Portugal 257 0.5 37.4 62.1

Romania 250 1 50.4 48.6

Slovenia 150 0.3 81.6 18.1

Slovakia 250 7.1 52.5 40.4

Finland 252 0 53.6 46.4

Sweden 250 0 22.4 77.6


Norway 200 0.9 51.5 47.6

Iceland 150 0.3 82.7 17


page 172

Table 44b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales – by segments


You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales



EU27 5439 2.2 58 39.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 4680 2.1 57.6 40.3

50-249 employees 638 2.5 61.3 36.2

250+ empolyees 119 2.2 55.7 42.1



626 3.9 72.5 23.6


4292 1.9 56.1 42.1




1601 1.3 47.3 51.3







3266 1.3 55.9 42.8



Well informed 3170 1.9 56 42.1



page 173

Table 45a. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales – by country



concerning your cross-border sales



EU27 1531 1.1 55.4 43.5

COUNTRY

Belgium 0 0 0 0

Bulgaria 0 0 0 0

Czech Rep. 0 0 0 0

Denmark 0 0 0 0

Germany 401 1.2 53.2 45.6

Estonia 0 0 0 0

Greece 0 0 0 0

Spain 0 0 0 0

France 0 0 0 0

Ireland 0 0 0 0

Italy 0 0 0 0

Cyprus 0 0 0 0

Latvia 0 0 0 0

Lithuania 0 0 0 0

Luxembourg 0 0 0 0

Hungary 0 0 0 0

Malta 0 0 0 0

Netherlands 0 0 0 0

Austria 250 0.3 73.5 26.2

Poland 0 0 0 0

Portugal 0 0 0 0

Romania 0 0 0 0

Slovenia 0 0 0 0

Slovakia 0 0 0 0

Finland 0 0 0 0

Sweden 0 0 0 0


Norway 0 0 0 0

Iceland 0 0 0 0


page 174

Table 45b. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer organisations in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-border sales – by segments



concerning your cross-border sales



EU27 1531 1.1 55.4 43.5

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 1314 1 54.7 44.2

50-249 employees 180 2.1 59.7 38.2

250+ empolyees 32 0 62 38



96 3.9 66.1 30.1


1401 0.9 53.7 45.3




393 0 54.7 45.3



Domestic sales only 978 0 37 63




831 0 58.6 41.4


Fully informed 291 3.6 53.7 42.8

Well informed 997 0.6 56.2 43.2



page 175

Table 46a. You were contacted by the European Consumer Centre concerning a specific consumer complaint – by country

QUESTION: A16_J. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 1.9 78.3 19.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 20.9 66.8 12.3

Bulgaria 250 0 61.7 38.3

Czech Rep. 250 5.1 79.5 15.4

Denmark 253 0.1 94.3 5.5

Germany 401 0 73.1 26.9

Estonia 150 1.1 96.7 2.2

Greece 250 3 82.1 14.9

Spain 400 4.5 60.4 35.1

France 400 1.3 86.8 11.9

Ireland 200 0.8 96.6 2.5

Italy 400 1.4 79.1 19.5

Cyprus 150 5.7 82.8 11.5

Latvia 150 0.9 88.5 10.7

Lithuania 200 0.9 84.4 14.7

Luxembourg 150 1.4 86.1 12.6

Hungary 253 0.9 68.8 30.3

Malta 150 2.3 93.9 3.8

Netherlands 250 2.8 76.5 20.7

Austria 250 0.3 90.4 9.3

Poland 400 3.2 84.3 12.5

Portugal 257 3.8 62 34.1

Romania 250 0 82.2 17.8

Slovenia 150 0.3 95.4 4.3

Slovakia 250 5.2 60.2 34.5

Finland 252 0.3 72.9 26.7

Sweden 250 0 54.4 45.6


Norway 200 18.1 64.8 17.1

Iceland 150 0 91.6 8.4


page 176

Table 46b. You were contacted by the European Consumer Centre concerning a specific consumer complaint – by segments

QUESTION: A16_J. In relation to consumer legislation. did any of the following take place in the past two years? -



EU27 6970 1.9 78.3 19.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 1.8 78.1 20.1

50-249 employees 817 2.4 80.5 17.1

250+ empolyees 151 2.3 72.6 25.1



722 2.5 86.1 11.4


5692 1.7 78 20.3




1994 2.3 75.7 22







4098 1.4 78.7 19.9



Well informed 4168 1.8 78.2 20



page 177

Table 47a. You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold – by country

QUESTION: A17_A. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold

Total N % Yes % No % Not applicable % DK/NA

EU27 6970 8.9 67 23.3 0.9

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 31.7 59.8 6.3 2.2

Bulgaria 250 5.1 58.6 36.3 0.1

Czech Rep. 250 9 66.1 22.6 2.3

Denmark 253 10.3 73.5 15.1 1.1

Germany 401 5.9 69.8 24.2 0

Estonia 150 9.1 69.6 20.7 0.6

Greece 250 13.4 63.1 23 0.5

Spain 400 9.1 60.1 30.7 0.2

France 400 5.1 65.3 29.6 0

Ireland 200 3.7 86.4 9.9 0

Italy 400 13.2 61.7 24.5 0.6

Cyprus 150 10.5 73.2 15.1 1.3

Latvia 150 7.6 66.1 26.3 0

Lithuania 200 30.9 39.7 29 0.4

Luxembourg 150 2.1 59 39 0

Hungary 253 13.2 63.5 22.3 1

Malta 150 11.1 65.4 20.6 2.9

Netherlands 250 11.7 63 21.4 3.8

Austria 250 9.5 73 15.8 1.7

Poland 400 7.9 70.5 20.4 1.1

Portugal 257 11.5 79.5 8.3 0.7

Romania 250 19 73.1 7.7 0.3

Slovenia 150 5.6 64.8 29.4 0.2

Slovakia 250 6.1 67.5 24.5 1.9

Finland 252 14.7 45.1 39.8 0.4

Sweden 250 13.1 33.5 50.9 2.4

United Kingdom 401 4 76.9 16.9 2.2

Norway 200 16.8 70.7 11.8 0.6

Iceland 150 14.8 73.9 10.7 0.6


page 178

Table 47b. You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold – by segments

QUESTION: A17_A. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products you sold

Total N % Yes % No

% Not

applicable % DK/NA

EU27 6970 8.9 67 23.3 0.9

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 8.3 68.5 22.5 0.8

50-249 employees 817 11.9 59.9 27.2 0.9

250+ empolyees 151 15.2 46.3 33.5 5



722 9.6 63.1 25.3 1.9


5692 8.4 68.3 22.7 0.6




1994 11.5 75 13.1 0.4


Do distant cross border sales 1773 6 68 24.8 1.3





4098 8.2 68.4 22.7 0.6


Fully informed 1574 8.6 63.8 26.8 0.9

Well informed 4168 9.3 66.5 23.4 0.8

Less than well informed 1149 8 72.3 18.7 0.9


page 179

Table 48a. The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling – by country

QUESTION: A17_B. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling


EU27 6970 22.2 51.9 23.8 2.1

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 38.2 49.6 8.9 3.3

Bulgaria 250 36.3 25.8 36.5 1.4

Czech Rep. 250 16.1 57.9 23.4 2.5

Denmark 253 29.6 55.3 14 1.1

Germany 401 22.1 52.1 24 1.8

Estonia 150 14.5 64.8 20.7 0

Greece 250 19.5 54.6 22.7 3.2

Spain 400 25.4 41.6 31.8 1.2

France 400 27.5 41.2 29.5 1.8

Ireland 200 10.5 77 9.9 2.5

Italy 400 19.7 53.9 25.2 1.2

Cyprus 150 39.6 40.8 14.5 5.1

Latvia 150 24.9 48.1 27.1 0

Lithuania 200 20.9 47 30.9 1.3

Luxembourg 150 18.1 39.4 41.6 0.9

Hungary 253 18.5 52.3 26.4 2.8

Malta 150 32.3 43.2 21.4 3.2

Netherlands 250 24.9 49.4 22 3.7

Austria 250 13.6 64.6 16.9 4.9

Poland 400 18.8 58.8 20.2 2.1

Portugal 257 17.4 70.6 11.7 0.3

Romania 250 56.2 34.5 7.4 1.9

Slovenia 150 12.5 56.7 30.4 0.4

Slovakia 250 16.1 55.8 24.5 3.7

Finland 252 11.8 47.3 40.3 0.7

Sweden 250 14.2 31.9 50.9 2.9

United Kingdom 401 13.5 65.5 18 3

Norway 200 32.5 53.1 11.9 2.5

Iceland 150 12.4 75.3 11.4 0.9


page 180

Table 48b. The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling – by segments

QUESTION: A17_B. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling

Total N % Yes % No

% Not

applicable % DK/NA

EU27 6970 22.2 51.9 23.8 2.1

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 22.1 53.1 23 1.8

50-249 employees 817 23 45.8 28.1 3.2

250+ empolyees 151 23.2 36.8 32.7 7.3



722 23 46.6 26.1 4.4


5692 21.9 53.2 23.2 1.7


Uses distance sales channels 4892 19.5 50 28.1 2.3


1994 28.7 57.1 12.9 1.4





Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 24 50.9 23.5 1.6


4098 21.8 52.2 23.9 2


Fully informed 1574 25.7 44.3 27.9 2.2

Well informed 4168 22 52.6 23.8 1.7



page 181

Table 49a. The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling – by country

QUESTION: A17_C. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling


EU27 6970 6.9 68.2 24.1 0.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 32.1 55.6 8.5 3.8

Bulgaria 250 5.5 53.8 38.6 2.1

Czech Rep. 250 7.3 67.3 22.8 2.6

Denmark 253 9.9 75.3 13.8 1

Germany 401 6.4 68.9 24.4 0.2

Estonia 150 5.8 73.3 20.4 0.5

Greece 250 5.5 69.5 24.4 0.5

Spain 400 3.9 63.2 32.4 0.5

France 400 8.9 61.4 29.5 0.2

Ireland 200 4.9 85.6 9.5 0

Italy 400 3.2 68.3 27.4 1.1

Cyprus 150 9.8 75.8 14.1 0.3

Latvia 150 2.7 69 27.8 0.4

Lithuania 200 6 61.9 31.7 0.4

Luxembourg 150 3 54.7 42.1 0.2

Hungary 253 6.7 65.7 27.5 0.2

Malta 150 8.3 69.7 20.6 1.4

Netherlands 250 15.7 59.7 21.4 3.1

Austria 250 5.8 77.5 16.2 0.4

Poland 400 3.8 76 19.4 0.8

Portugal 257 4.5 83.8 11.7 0

Romania 250 13.8 78.7 7 0.5

Slovenia 150 5 65.2 29.8 0

Slovakia 250 10.5 60.9 23.9 4.7

Finland 252 8.4 51.1 40.3 0.3

Sweden 250 6 41.8 50.9 1.3

United Kingdom 401 5 76.2 17.8 0.9

Norway 200 7 81 11.3 0.7

Iceland 150 1.8 85.8 11.6 0.7


page 182

Table 49b. The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling – by segments

QUESTION: A17_C. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you were selling

Total N % Yes % No

% Not

applicable % DK/NA

EU27 6970 6.9 68.2 24.1 0.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 7 69 23.3 0.7

50-249 employees 817 6.3 64.5 28.5 0.8

250+ empolyees 151 7 54.9 33.6 4.5



722 7.5 64.7 26.2 1.5


5692 6.5 69.5 23.5 0.5




1994 12.8 73.4 13 0.8







4098 6.2 69.1 24.2 0.6


Fully informed 1574 6.5 63.9 28.7 0.9

Well informed 4168 7.6 67.8 24 0.6



page 183

Table 50a. The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the products you were selling – by country

QUESTION: A17_D. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the products you were selling


EU27 6970 3.8 71.2 24 0.9

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 24 62.4 7.7 5.9

Bulgaria 250 2 57.5 38.2 2.3

Czech Rep. 250 5.9 68.7 22.8 2.6

Denmark 253 3.8 81.1 14.3 0.8

Germany 401 2.2 73.1 24.6 0

Estonia 150 4.2 75.3 20.5 0

Greece 250 3.5 70.8 24.9 0.8

Spain 400 2.9 65.3 31.3 0.6

France 400 7 63.2 29.5 0.3

Ireland 200 4.2 86.3 9.5 0

Italy 400 3.8 67.8 27.2 1.1

Cyprus 150 3.5 80.9 15.1 0.6

Latvia 150 0.4 69.8 27.1 2.7

Lithuania 200 1.6 67 31 0.4

Luxembourg 150 1.1 56.8 42.1 0

Hungary 253 3 69.6 27.2 0.2

Malta 150 2.6 75.4 20.6 1.4

Netherlands 250 5.8 69.3 21.4 3.5

Austria 250 2.4 80.1 16.5 1

Poland 400 1.3 78 20 0.6

Portugal 257 1.2 87.2 11.7 0

Romania 250 3.6 88.7 7.1 0.6

Slovenia 150 0.5 69.7 29.8 0

Slovakia 250 6.9 64.8 24.5 3.8

Finland 252 2.4 57.4 40.2 0

Sweden 250 2 46.1 50.9 1

United Kingdom 401 2.8 78.3 17.4 1.5

Norway 200 2.6 85.3 11.4 0.7

Iceland 150 0.6 88.4 10.5 0.6


page 184

Table 50b. The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the products you were selling – by segments

QUESTION: A17_D. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of any of the products you were selling

Total N % Yes % No

% Not

applicable % DK/NA

EU27 6970 3.8 71.2 24 0.9

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 3.8 72.1 23.2 0.9

50-249 employees 817 3.8 67 28.2 0.9

250+ empolyees 151 3.9 58.5 33.3 4.3



722 3.9 68.5 26.2 1.4


5692 3.5 72.5 23.3 0.7




1994 6.1 80 12.8 1





Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 4.6 70.4 24.1 1


4098 3.4 71.9 23.9 0.8


Fully informed 1574 4.1 65.8 29 1.1

Well informed 4168 3.8 71.8 23.6 0.8



page 185

Table 51a. You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the products you were selling were safe – by country

QUESTION: A17_E. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the products you were selling were safe


EU27 6970 27.6 43.9 26.7 1.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 28.4 48 11.2 12.4

Bulgaria 250 17.8 38.6 41.4 2.3

Czech Rep. 250 24.2 47.6 24.8 3.5

Denmark 253 27.9 49.8 21.5 0.8

Germany 401 23.5 49.3 26.2 1

Estonia 150 22.2 56.1 20.5 1.2

Greece 250 55.9 15.7 25.9 2.5

Spain 400 21 43 34.7 1.2

France 400 25.5 43.4 30.6 0.5

Ireland 200 33.1 49.2 16.9 0.8

Italy 400 19.2 51.4 28.8 0.6

Cyprus 150 57.7 24 17.5 0.7

Latvia 150 15.2 45.8 37.9 1.1

Lithuania 200 31.4 36.5 31.7 0.4

Luxembourg 150 20.2 37.7 42.1 0

Hungary 253 24.6 41.6 32.5 1.3

Malta 150 34.9 38.1 24.1 3

Netherlands 250 32.7 45 19.2 3.2

Austria 250 23.3 55.3 20.2 1.2

Poland 400 35.3 39.7 22.2 2.8

Portugal 257 37.9 49.9 11.9 0.3

Romania 250 49.8 34.6 11.9 3.7

Slovenia 150 21.8 38.8 37.1 2.3

Slovakia 250 22.7 47.9 25.2 4.3

Finland 252 18.1 41 40.4 0.5

Sweden 250 16.1 29.8 51.3 2.9

United Kingdom 401 36.2 37.6 23.3 2.8

Norway 200 43.5 39.3 15.1 2.1

Iceland 150 26.5 54.6 17.7 1.1


page 186

Table 51b. You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the products you were selling were safe – by segments

QUESTION: A17_E. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the products you were selling were safe

Total N % Yes % No

% Not

applicable % DK/NA

EU27 6970 27.6 43.9 26.7 1.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 26.9 45.3 26 1.8

50-249 employees 817 32.3 36.2 29.8 1.6

250+ empolyees 151 29.8 28.8 36.9 4.5



722 32.9 34.1 29.8 3.2


5692 27.2 45.3 26 1.4




1994 27 57.3 14.1 1.7







4098 26.7 45.1 26.5 1.7


Fully informed 1574 31.3 34.4 31.6 2.8

Well informed 4168 27.3 45 26.5 1.3



page 187

Table 52a. Other events relating to producst safety– by country

QUESTION: A17_F. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- Other action


EU27 6970 5.4 65.2 23.3 6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 24.2 53 9.1 13.8

Bulgaria 250 0.2 42.9 34.4 22.6

Czech Rep. 250 6.7 58.9 23.9 10.5

Denmark 253 8.7 63.7 16.3 11.3

Germany 401 7.8 67 22.3 2.8

Estonia 150 6.1 70.6 15.8 7.5

Greece 250 4.5 70.9 22.1 2.5

Spain 400 2.2 49.3 38 10.5

France 400 2.4 66.8 30.5 0.3

Ireland 200 6.9 82.5 9.8 0.8

Italy 400 1 69.9 24.5 4.5

Cyprus 150 14.5 64.6 12 8.9

Latvia 150 3.1 64.9 26.3 5.8

Lithuania 200 3 39.5 33.8 23.7

Luxembourg 150 0 58.4 41.6 0

Hungary 253 1 71.3 26 1.7

Malta 150 5.6 68 22.5 3.8

Netherlands 250 12.6 61.6 17.2 8.7

Austria 250 14 64.6 16.4 5.1

Poland 400 6.5 62.6 21.8 9.2

Portugal 257 8.9 78.3 11.5 1.3

Romania 250 8.2 70.9 7.8 13.1

Slovenia 150 2 65.5 29.4 3.1

Slovakia 250 5.1 67.3 23.9 3.7

Finland 252 2 42.9 27.5 27.5

Sweden 250 2.9 14 55.3 27.9

United Kingdom 401 3.9 80.2 13.2 2.7

Norway 200 21.1 49.7 17.4 11.9

Iceland 150 13.6 74.8 11 0.6


page 188

Table 52b. Other events relating to product safety – by segments

QUESTION: A17_F. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two years?

- Other action

Total N % Yes % No

% Not

applicable % DK/NA

EU27 6970 5.4 65.2 23.3 6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 5 66.4 22.6 5.9

50-249 employees 817 7.4 59.2 26.8 6.6

250+ empolyees 151 9.8 50.7 32.3 7.2



722 8.5 59.4 27.3 4.8


5692 4.8 67 22.6 5.7




1994 5.2 73.2 14.4 7.1


Do distant cross border sales 1773 6.9 64.2 23 5.9





4098 3.7 67.1 24 5.2


Fully informed 1574 6.5 60.9 26.8 5.8

Well informed 4168 5.4 64.5 23.9 6.1



page 189

Table 53a. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country – by country

QUESTION: A18_A. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety

legislation. Please say whether you strongly agree - agree - disagree - strongly disagree with the following statements. -

The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country.

Total N

% Strongly


% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 28.1 46.2 13.6 3.9 8.2

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 28.8 49.7 11.1 2.5 7.8

Bulgaria 250 14.2 42.3 28.9 1 13.6

Czech Rep. 250 34.3 36.3 12.2 0.7 16.5

Denmark 253 23 58.6 9.6 3.5 5.4

Germany 401 31 42.6 13.3 4.3 8.7

Estonia 150 19.5 44.1 21.2 3.9 11.4

Greece 250 19.4 33.1 23.7 19.8 3.9

Spain 400 28.6 45.1 18.9 2.9 4.4

France 400 37.8 40.1 12.9 4.6 4.7

Ireland 200 30.4 51.9 9.6 1.3 6.8

Italy 400 21.9 56.4 14 2.5 5.2

Cyprus 150 18.6 51.2 23.8 3 3.3

Latvia 150 13.8 57.9 21.3 0.9 6.1

Lithuania 200 19.4 38.7 27.1 5.1 9.7

Luxembourg 150 29.6 57.4 7.5 1.1 4.4

Hungary 253 32.5 44.7 12 2.2 8.6

Malta 150 34.6 51.4 7.8 2 4.3

Netherlands 250 10.6 64.2 12.1 1.8 11.2

Austria 250 52.3 28.7 9.5 5.2 4.4

Poland 400 7.2 46.5 30.2 4.2 11.9

Portugal 257 19.1 64.6 14.6 0.5 1.3

Romania 250 17.7 62.6 10.1 3.5 6

Slovenia 150 15.3 61.9 16.7 1.1 4.9

Slovakia 250 25.5 49.6 11.1 0.8 13

Finland 252 45.7 35.3 10.6 3.5 4.9

Sweden 250 32.8 38.5 9 4 15.8

United Kingdom 401 30.1 44.5 7 4.8 13.6

Norway 200 32.9 44 14.6 2.5 6

Iceland 150 16.9 54.7 15.5 8.8 4.1


page 190

Table 53b. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country – by segments

QUESTION: A18_A. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 28.1 46.2 13.6 3.9 8.2

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 27 46.4 14 4 8.6

50-249 employees 817 35.6 44.1 10.6 3.6 6.1

250+ empolyees 151 31.4 50.1 12.3 2.1 4.1



722 25.4 49.4 13.8 3.7 7.8


5692 28.3 45.5 13.9 4 8.4




1994 29.1 49.5 12.6 3 5.9


Do distant cross border sales 1773 24.5 47.9 14 4.9 8.7



Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 35 42.3 12.9 3.3 6.5


4098 24 48.5 14.5 4.4 8.6


Fully informed 1574 37.9 39.3 12.6 3.9 6.3

Well informed 4168 26.9 49.9 12 3.4 7.7



page 191

Table 54a. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in my sector in my country – by country

QUESTION: A18_B. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in my sector in my

country.

Total N

% Strongly


% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 26.6 48.5 11.4 3.5 10

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 22.5 55.6 12.6 1.3 8

Bulgaria 250 9.8 41.2 23.1 0.6 25.2

Czech Rep. 250 27.2 38.5 11.4 4.3 18.6

Denmark 253 19.8 58.2 8 3.6 10.4

Germany 401 29.8 47.7 10.7 4.1 7.6

Estonia 150 21.6 35.3 21.4 2.8 19

Greece 250 22.7 30.4 23.7 17.2 6

Spain 400 27 50 15.3 3.2 4.6

France 400 38.2 41.7 9.2 4.6 6.2

Ireland 200 28.5 51.5 9.4 2.4 8.1

Italy 400 20.7 59.2 12.2 1.3 6.6

Cyprus 150 16.6 54.1 22.1 3.6 3.6

Latvia 150 8.3 56.5 14.5 2.4 18.3

Lithuania 200 15 42.4 21.8 6.4 14.3

Luxembourg 150 28 53.4 7.4 1.1 10

Hungary 253 31.7 44.5 8.9 2 12.8

Malta 150 34.7 49.2 8.2 1.4 6.5

Netherlands 250 14.3 60.6 7.2 3.1 14.9

Austria 250 48 29.2 6.3 4.9 11.6

Poland 400 6.8 49.1 28.9 2 13.2

Portugal 257 18 59 17.5 0.5 5

Romania 250 15.7 62.3 11.5 3.4 7.2

Slovenia 150 14.7 63 13.8 0 8.5

Slovakia 250 25 52.7 7.6 1.4 13.4

Finland 252 34.6 32.1 8 6.3 19

Sweden 250 22.5 32.3 6 1.6 37.7

United Kingdom 401 29 48 6 3.1 13.9

Norway 200 32.2 41.7 13.2 2.3 10.5

Iceland 150 17.9 47.2 20.4 4.5 10


page 192

Table 54b. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in my sector in my country – by segments

QUESTION: A18_B. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with product safety legislation in my sector in my

country.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 26.6 48.5 11.4 3.5 10

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 25.2 49.3 11.7 3.6 10.3

50-249 employees 817 36.5 42.5 9.3 3.1 8.6

250+ empolyees 151 27.5 50.1 11.1 1.4 9.9



722 25.8 50.5 8.5 4.6 10.6


5692 27 47.8 11.9 3.4 9.8




1994 26.7 50.7 11.9 3.6 7.1



Domestic sales only 4952 27 47.9 11.8 3.4 9.9




4098 23 49.9 13 3.9 10.2


Fully informed 1574 36.3 40.7 10 3.9 9.1

Well informed 4168 25.1 51.6 10.7 3 9.6



page 193

Table 55a. Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country – by country

QUESTION: A18_C. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country.

Total N

% Strongly


% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 19.6 43.2 13.5 4 19.6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 21 49.3 18.3 2.4 8.9

Bulgaria 250 2.6 24.4 32.5 1.6 39

Czech Rep. 250 22.5 35.9 8.2 2.3 31.1

Denmark 253 12.3 54.9 11.3 3.6 17.9

Germany 401 17.9 35.8 17.1 5.6 23.5

Estonia 150 10.5 34.5 25 3.3 26.6

Greece 250 16.7 46 12.8 9.2 15.3

Spain 400 18.7 46.2 16.6 3.7 14.8

France 400 30.5 37.6 9.2 4 18.7

Ireland 200 25 55.3 7.3 2.4 9.9

Italy 400 21.8 52.7 10.1 1.4 14

Cyprus 150 13.8 41.3 29.4 2.1 13.3

Latvia 150 5 37 38.7 0.9 18.4

Lithuania 200 10.5 34.8 23.7 5.5 25.5

Luxembourg 150 26.1 43.1 11.8 0.6 18.4

Hungary 253 12.3 35.1 22.5 7.1 22.9

Malta 150 24.9 44.8 12.3 3.7 14.3

Netherlands 250 8.6 65 7.5 2.1 16.8

Austria 250 32.7 25.9 10.9 9.1 21.5

Poland 400 4.2 39.1 31.1 1.9 23.6

Portugal 257 16 59.2 10 0.3 14.4

Romania 250 9.1 42.7 17.7 7.5 23

Slovenia 150 11.9 56.2 22 2 8.1

Slovakia 250 19.4 46.5 9.2 1.3 23.6

Finland 252 33.7 36.7 14.2 5.8 9.7

Sweden 250 20.2 27 9.4 7.6 35.8

United Kingdom 401 22.9 48.7 6.2 3.3 19

Norway 200 25.2 38.2 14.1 7.8 14.7

Iceland 150 8.4 44.8 25.5 6.3 15


page 194

Table 55b. Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country – by segments

QUESTION: A18_C. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation in my sector in my country.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 19.6 43.2 13.5 4 19.6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 19.2 43.6 13.5 4.1 19.6

50-249 employees 817 22.9 39.3 13.4 3.8 20.6

250+ empolyees 151 18.6 48.7 14.7 2.2 15.7



722 18.2 46.4 13.1 2.8 19.4


5692 19.8 42.9 13.7 4.2 19.5




1994 19.4 43.5 13.8 4 19.2


Do distant cross border sales 1773 18 42.1 15 5.4 19.4



Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 23.6 44.6 12.5 3.4 16


4098 17.2 43.1 14.6 4.6 20.6


Fully informed 1574 28.1 39.7 10.7 4.9 16.6

Well informed 4168 18.1 44.7 13.6 3.3 20.1



page 195

Table 56a. The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of practice in my sector in my country – by country

QUESTION: A18_D. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of practice in my sector in my

country.

Total N

% Strongly


% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 20.2 43.4 13.3 4.1 19

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 18.6 48 15.9 1.9 15.7

Bulgaria 250 3.5 23.6 27.7 0.8 44.4

Czech Rep. 250 23.9 32.5 15.2 3.9 24.5

Denmark 253 8.7 54 11 1.4 24.9

Germany 401 14.6 36.9 15.1 7.4 26

Estonia 150 10.3 22.9 22.8 1.6 42.4

Greece 250 16.8 35.9 16.9 9.2 21.2

Spain 400 18.4 46.5 16.9 4.9 13.2

France 400 30.4 38.8 13 3.6 14.3

Ireland 200 30.3 51.3 6.9 2.9 8.6

Italy 400 18.5 54.3 13.2 1.7 12.2

Cyprus 150 14.1 42.7 21.8 1.8 19.5

Latvia 150 4.8 38.6 28.6 0.9 27.1

Lithuania 200 8.1 25.7 23.9 4.1 38.3

Luxembourg 150 29.3 53.1 7.7 0 10

Hungary 253 13.1 29.9 24.3 5.8 26.9

Malta 150 20.7 50.6 12 1.8 14.9

Netherlands 250 11.6 59.1 10 1.3 18

Austria 250 24.5 24.2 9 8.8 33.5

Poland 400 3.7 39.5 28.3 1.4 27.1

Portugal 257 20.9 63.2 11.1 1.2 3.7

Romania 250 13.2 52.6 11.7 3.7 18.8

Slovenia 150 10.2 54.9 20.8 3.9 10.2

Slovakia 250 18.2 42.9 9.5 2.1 27.3

Finland 252 34.8 28.3 12.7 2.8 21.4

Sweden 250 33 27.2 7 6.4 26.4

United Kingdom 401 30.4 50 4.2 2.7 12.8

Norway 200 35.7 45.5 10.6 3.1 5

Iceland 150 10.3 39.7 32.4 4.7 12.9


page 196

Table 56b. The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of practice in my sector in my country – by segments

QUESTION: A18_D. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts or codes of practice in my sector in my

country.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 20.2 43.4 13.3 4.1 19

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 19.4 43.7 13.6 4.2 19.1

50-249 employees 817 25.9 41.1 11.4 3.8 17.9

250+ empolyees 151 20.9 45.8 13.7 2.7 17



722 21.7 46.6 13.4 2.9 15.3


5692 20.1 42.9 13.3 4.5 19.2


Uses distance sales channels 4892 20.7 42.9 13 4.6 18.8


1994 19 44.5 14.3 3.1 19.1



Domestic sales only 4952 20.1 44.1 13.2 3.7 19




4098 16.2 44.1 14.3 5 20.5


Fully informed 1574 28.3 39.8 12.8 3.4 15.8

Well informed 4168 19.1 44.9 12.8 3.6 19.6

Less than well informed 1149 12.6 43.8 16.5 7.1 20


page 197

Table 57a. The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation – by country

QUESTION: A18_E. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation.

Total N

% Strongly


% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 20.9 44.1 21.2 5 8.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 12.4 44.4 22.9 5.1 15.2

Bulgaria 250 14.5 50.5 18.7 0.3 16

Czech Rep. 250 19.5 34.4 22.8 7.7 15.6

Denmark 253 20.8 63.2 8.8 0.1 7

Germany 401 21.2 47.7 21.1 3.5 6.5

Estonia 150 8.2 48.1 26.5 6.1 11.1

Greece 250 28.2 39.3 16 9.3 7.2

Spain 400 13.9 31.8 36.7 8.6 9

France 400 28.3 40.7 21.4 6.7 3

Ireland 200 29.2 49.5 9.6 5 6.7

Italy 400 9.9 49.6 25.2 3.8 11.5

Cyprus 150 12 49 25.5 3 10.6

Latvia 150 3.3 53.6 23.9 0.9 18.4

Lithuania 200 5.3 41 28 8 17.7

Luxembourg 150 12.6 29.6 32.5 12.1 13.2

Hungary 253 27.6 43.7 12.4 5.9 10.4

Malta 150 13.4 42.2 21.6 13.1 9.6

Netherlands 250 11.7 57.2 14.2 0.9 16

Austria 250 29 37 15.2 9.9 9

Poland 400 6.8 33.1 45.2 3.5 11.5

Portugal 257 10.8 59.4 24.5 0.4 4.8

Romania 250 6.6 46.4 26.6 4 16.4

Slovenia 150 10.7 55.6 22.3 4.6 6.8

Slovakia 250 18.6 43.8 18.1 2.1 17.5

Finland 252 15 40.5 29.3 9 6.2

Sweden 250 33.6 35.7 9.4 6.7 14.6

United Kingdom 401 35.6 44.5 8.3 4.5 7.1

Norway 200 31.4 42.2 17.9 3.5 5

Iceland 150 10.5 54.4 26.1 4 5


page 198

Table 57b. The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation – by segments

QUESTION: A18_E. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer legislation.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 20.9 44.1 21.2 5 8.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 20.3 44.5 21.3 5 9

50-249 employees 817 25.2 41.1 20.7 5 8

250+ empolyees 151 22.6 44.7 19 4.1 9.6



722 22.9 44.2 21.7 5.7 5.5


5692 21.1 44.1 21 4.8 9




1994 16.9 45.6 23.7 4.7 9.2







4098 17.7 44.6 23.3 5 9.4


Fully informed 1574 27.8 39.7 18 5.5 9

Well informed 4168 18.8 46.3 22 4.4 8.6

Less than well informed 1149 19.1 43 22.8 6.3 8.7


page 199

Table 58. I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story – by country

QUESTION: A18_F. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story.

Total N

% Strongly


% Strongly

disagree % DK/NA

EU27 6970 3.3 14 36.8 38.3 7.7

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 16.3 19.9 39.4 14.8 9.5

Bulgaria 250 4.1 14.5 55.7 6.1 19.6

Czech Rep. 250 12 13 46.6 16 12.5

Denmark 253 2.2 26 41.4 21 9.4

Germany 401 0.8 7.2 38 51.2 2.8

Estonia 150 1.9 8.6 52.9 23.6 13

Greece 250 8 11.4 31.8 43.7 5.2

Spain 400 4.6 16.1 40.2 33.9 5.2

France 400 1.7 11.5 19 65.5 2.3

Ireland 200 6.8 13.3 40.6 25.5 13.9

Italy 400 2.2 11.2 36.7 37.2 12.7

Cyprus 150 2.5 20 50.4 15.9 11.3

Latvia 150 0 10.4 72.4 16.7 0.4

Lithuania 200 1.9 5.5 47 23.4 22.2

Luxembourg 150 2.6 14.8 22.8 56.2 3.5

Hungary 253 4.7 24.1 40.1 17.3 13.9

Malta 150 2.3 15.5 42.1 30.9 9.3

Netherlands 250 1.9 16.2 53.9 18.4 9.5

Austria 250 1 9.4 15.1 68.6 6

Poland 400 1.6 14.1 66 11.7 6.6

Portugal 257 0.4 22.3 37.3 38.8 1.1

Romania 250 2 19.3 44.6 25.9 8.2

Slovenia 150 2 14.9 55.6 24.3 3.3

Slovakia 250 14.8 20.2 37.7 9.8 17.5

Finland 252 1.9 13 28.5 54 2.7

Sweden 250 5.2 10.7 22 50.5 11.7

United Kingdom 401 4.8 20.6 32.9 29 12.8

Norway 200 4.5 17.2 19.5 54.8 4.1

Iceland 150 3 18.4 37.7 38.6 2.3


page 200

Table 58b. I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story – by segments

QUESTION: A18_F. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product safety


I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story.

Total N

%

Strongly

agree % Agree

%

Disagree

%

Strongly

disagree

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 3.3 14 36.8 38.3 7.7

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 3.2 14 36.9 38.2 7.7

50-249 employees 817 4.2 13.3 35.5 40.3 6.6

250+ empolyees 151 3.7 16.2 38 30.6 11.6



722 4.9 15.3 34.9 38.7 6.3


5692 3 14 36.8 38.8 7.4


Uses distance sales channels 4892 3.1 13.6 36 39.5 7.8


1994 3.7 15.4 38 35.9 7


Do distant cross border sales 1773 2.7 12 35.6 44.4 5.3





4098 2.4 12.3 36.9 40.9 7.5


Fully informed 1574 4.7 16.6 33.6 37.5 7.6

Well informed 4168 2.9 13.9 38.5 37.8 6.9

Less than well informed 1149 3.1 11 34.5 42.1 9.2


page 201

Table 59a. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 1 – by country

QUESTION: A19_01-07. What were the main issues consumers complained about in the past twelve months?


T

ota

l N

Qu

ali

ty o

f th

e p

rod

uct

(o

r se

rvic

e)

Aft

er s

ale

s o

r re

dre

ss

Del

iver

y,

pro

vis

ion

, in

sta

lla

tio

n

(in

clu

din

g

cust

om

er s

erv

ice)

Pri

ce,

tari

ff,

inv

oic

e o

r b

ill

Co

ntr

act

ter

ms

or

gu

ara

nte

es

Mis

lea

din

g

ad

ver

tise

men

t,

ag

gre

ssiv

e s

ell

ing

o

r fr

au

du

len

t p

ract

ices

La

ck o

f cl

ear

info

rma

tio

n

EU27 6970 19.6 8.6 8.9 20 3 1.8 3.4

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 18.5 7.4 8.2 28.7 3.9 0 3.5

Bulgaria 250 14.1 3.4 5.2 16.9 4.8 0 0.7

Czech Rep. 250 13.1 2.2 2 22.5 6.2 0.7 3.3

Denmark 253 20.9 6.2 7.1 17 9.5 2.5 5.4

Germany 401 20.3 11 9.2 20.7 1.2 3.2 2.6

Estonia 150 12.5 0.5 5.4 13.3 3 0.5 1.9

Greece 250 18.7 2.7 8.7 15.3 4.8 0 3.3

Spain 400 18.8 7.9 5.7 20.1 0 1 1.4

France 400 12.2 6.5 5.2 11.7 0.6 0.9 2.9

Ireland 200 15.4 0.6 3.2 24.4 2 1 3.1

Italy 400 19.4 6.2 6.5 30 2.1 1.6 2.4

Cyprus 150 11.1 3.9 11.2 15.8 0.9 0 0

Latvia 150 21.8 3.3 3.3 25 1.8 0 4.1

Lithuania 200 20.8 4.3 3.4 14.5 4.5 1.5 1.6

Luxembourg 150 23.3 12.5 6.5 20.4 4.6 0.6 2.5

Hungary 253 15.9 1.3 4.1 8.2 1.9 0.5 2.2

Malta 150 17.2 10.6 5.5 24.6 0 1.5 1.6

Netherlands 250 32.7 7.2 15.9 26.8 6.8 1.8 3.9

Austria 250 18.9 6.2 8.1 21.8 1.6 0.6 8.9

Poland 400 15.5 5.3 4.5 9.4 1.6 0.1 0.6

Portugal 257 21.1 24.3 6.1 28 0.3 3.9 4.5

Romania 250 1.6 3.3 7.7 17.6 1.7 0 2.3

Slovenia 150 23 4.3 6.8 18.4 3.4 1.2 5.7

Slovakia 250 16.4 3.8 1.2 27.2 2 0.4 2.4

Finland 252 46.7 10.5 23.6 32 0 1.7 9.6

Sweden 250 34.4 4.3 6 16.3 5.9 0.3 4.4

United Kingdom 401 25.2 15.3 18.4 19.3 8 3.6 6.1

Norway 200 49.5 9 15.2 22 2.8 1.4 5.1

Iceland 150 29.3 26.1 16.5 34.3 8.9 1.1 5.7


page 202

Table 59b. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 1 – by segments



To

tal

N

Qu

ali

ty o

f th

e p

rod

uct

(o

r se

rvic

e)

Aft

er s

ale

s o

r re

dre

ss

Del

iver

y,

pro

vis

ion

, in

sta

lla

tio

n

(in

clu

din

g c

ust

om

er

serv

ice)

Pri

ce,

tari

ff,

inv

oic

e o

r b

ill

Co

ntr

act

ter

ms

or

gu

ara

nte

es

Mis

lea

din

g

ad

ver

tise

men

t,

ag

gre

ssiv

e s

ell

ing

or

fra

ud

ule

nt

pra

ctic

es

La

ck o

f cl

ear

info

rma

tio

n

EU27 6970 19.6 8.6 8.9 20 3 1.8 3.4

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 18.8 8 8.5 19.6 2.8 1.8 3.2

50-249 employees 817 24.3 12.6 11.4 23.1 3.7 1.8 3.8

250+ empolyees 151 24.8 12.2 11.8 21 5.7 1.9 7.3



722 25.1 12.4 11.5 20.3 5.8 3.4 4.3


5692 18.8 8.3 8.5 20.3 2.7 1.7 3.2



4892 19.6 9.3 10 19.7 3.7 1.8 3.9


1994 19.8 7.3 6.4 20.9 1.2 1.9 2.2



1773 20 9.5 10.7 18.7 2.6 2.2 3.9




2536 21.8 11.9 9.4 21.1 3.6 2 4


4098 18.3 7 8.7 20 2.7 1.6 3


Fully informed 1574 16.8 8.2 6.6 19.3 2.9 1.6 4.4

Well informed 4168 19.6 8.7 8.3 19.6 2.7 1.6 3



page 203

Table 60a. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 2 – by country



T

ota

l N

Inci

den

ce r

ela

ted

to

u

nsa

fe p

rod

uct

s o

r se

rvic

es

Eth

ica

l o

r en

vir

on

men

tal

asp

ects

Pri

va

cy i

ssu

es

Dif

ficu

ltie

s in

sw

itch

ing

/ c

ha

ng

ing

p

rov

ider

Oth

ers

No

ne

DK

/NA

EU27 6970 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.1 9 29.1 10.4

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 0.7 0.9 0.7 1.7 10.8 24.7 10

Bulgaria 250 0 0 0 0.5 17 8.7 24.5

Czech Rep. 250 0.1 0 0.3 0 13.5 23.2 16.6

Denmark 253 2.2 2.8 0.7 2.7 8.4 44.5 5.4

Germany 401 1.3 1.4 2.6 1.1 5.8 24 6.3

Estonia 150 0 0.9 1.9 1.1 8.4 3.2 38.1

Greece 250 2 0.5 2.9 0 7.4 45.6 4

Spain 400 7.2 1.8 0 1.2 17.3 37.5 0.1

France 400 0 1 0.6 0 8 18.2 24.3

Ireland 200 1.1 1.2 0 0 11.1 33.4 14.4

Italy 400 0 1 0.4 0 5.9 38.6 3.3

Cyprus 150 0.3 0.6 1.8 0 9.8 41.7 8.8

Latvia 150 0 3.5 1 0 3.9 29.8 13.4

Lithuania 200 0.6 0 0.4 0 6.3 2.2 29.5

Luxembourg 150 0 1.1 0 0.2 6.8 27.8 18.5

Hungary 253 0 0 0.2 0.8 11.7 30.2 22.6

Malta 150 2.9 0.6 0 0.8 11.3 35.3 5.8

Netherlands 250 4.7 1.3 1.5 4 9.4 26 6.7

Austria 250 4 3.3 0.3 0.3 8.3 17.9 17

Poland 400 0.1 0.4 0 0.4 9.5 23.9 21.6

Portugal 257 3.7 0.1 0 0.8 4.1 20.7 13.7

Romania 250 0 2 0 1.3 12.2 10.3 29

Slovenia 150 0 0 2.1 3.6 6.1 32.8 3.7

Slovakia 250 0 0.5 0.2 1.4 13.1 18.8 12.3

Finland 252 2.1 2.3 1.3 2.1 8.7 12.5 6.9

Sweden 250 0.3 2.4 0.8 0.1 20.5 15.7 4.9

United Kingdom 401 2.2 2.8 3.2 2.5 7 44.4 6.5

Norway 200 3.4 2.2 1.4 3.7 14.6 11.6 4.7

Iceland 150 3 3 3 3 6.6 17.9 3.6


page 204

Table 60b. Main issues which consumers complained about in the past 12 months – part 2 – by segments



To

tal

N

Inci

den

ce r

ela

ted

to

u

nsa

fe p

rod

uct

s o

r se

rvic

es

Eth

ica

l o

r en

vir

on

men

tal

asp

ects

Pri

va

cy i

ssu

es

Dif

ficu

ltie

s in

sw

itch

ing

/ c

ha

ng

ing

p

rov

ider

Oth

ers

No

ne

DK

/NA

EU27 6970 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.1 9 29.1 10.4

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 1.8 1.5 1.2 0.9 8.7 30.7 10.4

50-249 employees 817 1.8 1.6 2.3 2 11.2 19.7 10.2

250+ empolyees 151 3.3 1.9 3 4.5 12.3 15.7 12.2



722 2.9 2.2 1.2 1.1 9.3 22.9 10.2


5692 1.9 1.5 1.5 1.1 9.2 29.5 10.2



4892 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.2 9.3 30.3 9.7


1994 1.3 0.8 0.7 0.8 8.5 26 11.8



1773 1.4 2.7 1.8 1.6 7.9 28.4 9.7

Domestic sales only 4952 2.1 1.1 1.2 0.8 9.4 29 10.2



2536 2.3 2 1.7 1.2 8.7 28.6 7.5


4098 1.7 1.2 1.2 0.9 9.2 28.8 11.7


Fully informed 1574 2.7 1.7 1.4 1 8.9 32.7 10

Well informed 4168 1.6 1.3 1.3 1.1 9.2 28.3 10.7



page 205

Table 61a. Percentage of satisfactorily resolved complaints – by country

QUESTION: A20. What percentage of complaints you received in the past twelve months could you resolve directly

with the consumer to their satisfaction?

Total N % None % 1 - 50 % 51 - 80 % 81 - 99 % 100 % DK/NA

EU27 6970 7.2 5.2 4.8 17.5 43.3 22

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 2.9 6.8 17.1 14.3 42.6 16.3

Bulgaria 250 3.6 2.5 3.4 6.4 26.7 57.4

Czech Rep. 250 13 7.3 1.1 9.2 49.2 20.2

Denmark 253 1.5 3.3 4.4 20 55.3 15.5

Germany 401 0.7 4.1 7.6 26.7 51.1 9.9

Estonia 150 7.8 0.4 3 24 47.1 17.8

Greece 250 7.8 6.9 8 13.8 38.1 25.5

Spain 400 22.5 7.7 2.8 17.5 41.1 8.5

France 400 3.9 3.8 3.9 11.8 41.7 34.9

Ireland 200 1.2 4.4 7.9 16.1 40.6 29.7

Italy 400 15.9 10.7 4.6 6.6 28.4 33.8

Cyprus 150 12 10.6 5.5 10.3 33.1 28.5

Latvia 150 0 1.1 3.1 17.8 34.7 43.3

Lithuania 200 2.4 11 8.4 7.5 32.7 37.9

Luxembourg 150 1.7 1.7 2.6 11.2 37.4 45.3

Hungary 253 13.1 1.7 1.9 7.2 42.9 33.2

Malta 150 13.9 18.2 1.6 8.5 27.7 30.1

Netherlands 250 5 5.9 5.4 31.8 34.3 17.6

Austria 250 6.7 1.5 5.7 20.7 43.7 21.8

Poland 400 10.3 8.8 5.7 15.8 39.8 19.6

Portugal 257 27.9 3.6 7.4 21.2 34.2 5.7

Romania 250 5.6 5 1.9 12.5 39.5 35.5

Slovenia 150 9.6 11.5 4.5 5.3 42.6 26.5

Slovakia 250 2.3 2.1 3.2 10.9 71 10.5

Finland 252 1.1 1.2 2.4 16.4 69.5 9.5

Sweden 250 1.2 2.7 8.9 28.3 44.4 14.5

United Kingdom 401 1.8 3.1 1.6 17.5 48.5 27.5

Norway 200 0.6 4.9 8.3 30.7 52.3 3.3

Iceland 150 2.9 1.5 12.6 16.7 50.3 15.9


page 206

Table 61b. Percentage of satisfactorily resolved complaints – by segments

QUESTION: A20. What percentage of complaints you received in the past twelve months could you resolve directly

with the consumer to their satisfaction?

Total N % None % 1 - 50

% 51 -

80

% 81 -

99 % 100

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 7.2 5.2 4.8 17.5 43.3 22

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 7.5 5 4.4 17.1 43.7 22.3

50-249 employees 817 5.7 6.2 7.2 19.1 42.8 19.1

250+ empolyees 151 5.6 6 11 21.8 30.9 24.7



722 6.2 7 6.9 21.4 41.5 16.9


5692 7.7 5.1 4.6 17.5 44.1 21.1


Uses distance sales channels 4892 6.7 5.1 5.2 19 42.8 21.2


1994 8.7 5.4 3.9 13.3 44.9 23.8


Do distant cross border sales 1773 4 4.4 5.6 20.3 48.8 17



Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 6.3 3.5 4.3 21.6 44.8 19.4


4098 7.9 6.2 5 14.7 43.4 22.8


Fully informed 1574 7 4.8 3.6 18.8 42 23.8

Well informed 4168 7.3 5.5 5.1 16.9 43.9 21.3

Less than well informed 1149 7.6 4.8 5.6 17.2 45 19.8


page 207

Table 62a. Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with customers – by country

QUESTION: A21_01-09. In the past two years, have you used Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms (i.e.

arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards, other out-of-court dispute

resolution bodies) to settle disputes with customers?


To

tal

N

No

, a

nd

I d

o n

ot

kn

ow

an

y o

f th

ose

m

ech

an

ism

s

No

, b

ut

I k

no

w

som

e A

DR

m

ech

an

ism

s

No

, b

ut

I a

m

mem

ber

of

an

AD

R

bo

dy

Yes

, I

ha

ve

use

d

AD

R m

ech

an

ism

s

Yes

, I

reg

ula

rly

use

th

ose

mec

ha

nis

ms

Yes

, th

rou

gh

th

e A

DR

bo

dy

I a

m a

m

emb

er o

f

DK

/NA

EU27 6970 39.9 43 4.3 6.4 1.7 1.2 8.6

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 48.8 17.1 5.5 3.3 4.2 0.3 23.1

Bulgaria 250 31.8 48.8 1.1 8.8 2.1 0 8.1

Czech Rep. 250 45.4 39.1 2.2 7.7 2.6 0.2 7.7

Denmark 253 35.8 24.6 11.8 13.7 3.1 2.7 10.3

Germany 401 31.8 54.6 6.9 7.3 2.6 1.9 5.1

Estonia 150 29.4 46 4.3 8.5 1.1 0 12.4

Greece 250 36.8 57.1 3.2 4 0.3 0 5.3

Spain 400 49 41 2 7.3 0.9 0.6 1.2

France 400 59 25.2 0.2 6.7 1.3 0.5 8.3

Ireland 200 17.5 59.1 7.9 8.3 0.2 1.8 14.2

Italy 400 44.6 37.3 0 3.1 1.2 0 13.8

Cyprus 150 60.3 24.8 0.7 5.8 1.2 0 7.3

Latvia 150 43.6 50.9 0 3.1 0.2 0 3.3

Lithuania 200 24.6 47.2 0 3.1 2.2 0 23.3

Luxembourg 150 51.1 35.1 0.5 5.3 0.6 1.1 8.5

Hungary 253 30.3 49.8 1.7 4.4 2.7 0.8 12.5

Malta 150 38.2 33.7 1.2 15 0.3 0.3 11.9

Netherlands 250 42.2 28.2 17.4 7.6 2.6 3 11.3

Austria 250 20.7 67.3 0.7 5.4 2.4 0.4 5.6

Poland 400 50.4 39.3 1.1 5.7 1.4 0 3.6

Portugal 257 32 58.6 0.1 6.6 2.9 0.3 2.9

Romania 250 48.9 34.8 2.1 5.1 1.3 0 10.4

Slovenia 150 34.9 56.1 1.1 5.2 1.9 0 2.7

Slovakia 250 45.2 32.3 2.2 6.2 1.3 0.4 15.6

Finland 252 59.4 32.5 0 4.1 0.3 0 4.5

Sweden 250 55.4 32.3 1.4 2.8 0 0 11.1

United Kingdom 401 26.5 49.3 8.6 7.2 1.5 3 13.3

Norway 200 16.7 41.1 8.2 24.5 5.4 2 4.6

Iceland 150 50.2 38.9 5.6 4.8 0.5 1.4 4.3


page 208

Table 62b. Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms to settle disputes with customers – by segments

QUESTION: A21_01-09. In the past two years, have you used Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms (i.e.

arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards, other out-of-court dispute

resolution bodies) to settle disputes with customers?


To

tal

N

No

, a

nd

I d

o n

ot

kn

ow

an

y o

f th

ose

m

ech

an

ism

s

No

, b

ut

I k

no

w

som

e A

DR

m

ech

an

ism

s

No

, b

ut

I a

m

mem

ber

of

an

A

DR

bo

dy

Yes

, I

ha

ve

use

d

AD

R m

ech

an

ism

s

Yes

, I

reg

ula

rly

u

se t

ho

se

mec

ha

nis

ms

Yes

, th

rou

gh

th

e A

DR

bo

dy

I a

m a

m

emb

er o

f

DK

/NA

EU27 6970 39.9 43 4.3 6.4 1.7 1.2 8.6

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 40.4 43.4 4.5 6 1.5 1 8.4

50-249 employees 817 38.7 41.4 3.6 8 2.7 2.4 8.4

250+ empolyees 151 28.4 35.7 2 14.4 6.2 3.1 16.2



722 40.6 37.1 2.9 7.8 2.2 1.4 12.4


5692 39.3 45.1 4.6 6.2 1.7 1.3 7.2


Uses distance sales channels 4892 36.6 44.8 4.7 7.1 1.8 1.5 9.1


1994 47.9 38.4 3.3 4.8 1.7 0.5 7.3


Do distant cross border sales 1773 35.9 45.5 3.8 6.7 2.1 1.5 9.8



Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 31.8 46.3 8.2 9.3 2.7 2.3 8.4


4098 45.1 41.3 2.2 4.9 1.3 0.5 7.7


Fully informed 1574 37.8 43.9 5.2 7.7 2.1 2.1 8

Well informed 4168 37.9 45.5 4.5 6.5 1.8 1 8.2



page 209

Table 63a. Reasons for not using ADR mechanisms – by country

QUESTION: A22a_01-99. Why have you not used ADR?


Base: retailers who did not use ADR in the past two years

To

tal

N

Yo

u w

ou

ld b

e p

rep

are

d

to u

se A

DR

bu

t th

ere

ha

s n

ever

bee

n a

ne

ed

Yo

u d

id n

ot

kn

ow

AD

R

wa

s a

va

ila

ble

in

yo

ur

cou

ntr

y f

or

yo

ur

sect

or

Yo

u d

id n

ot

feel

su

ffic

ien

tly

in

form

ed

a

bo

ut

the

AD

R p

roce

ss

Yo

u d

id n

ot

tru

st t

he

AD

R p

roce

ss

AD

R i

s to

o t

ime

con

sum

ing

AD

R i

s to

o e

xp

ensi

ve

Yo

u p

refe

rred

to

res

olv

e th

e m

att

er i

n c

ou

rt

AD

R i

s n

ot

av

ail

ab

le i

n

yo

ur

cou

ntr

y f

or

yo

ur

sect

or

Oth

er

DK

/NA

EU27 5818 48.4 8.9 10 1.7 4.1 2.8 5 2.5 27.8 9.3

COUNTRY

Belgium 175 11.8 7.6 5.8 1.7 3.4 11.6 4.3 1.9 32.4 26.3

Bulgaria 202 36.1 0.8 0.7 0.2 1.5 0.1 2.9 0.2 36.2 23.9

Czech Rep. 206 24.1 4.4 4.6 2.8 2.6 3 2.8 1.2 46 11.2

Denmark 178 23.2 6.3 5.2 2.6 3.5 2.6 1.1 0.5 47.4 9.5

Germany 342 72.7 6.4 7.8 0.7 5.5 4.4 4.6 3.3 13.7 4.3

Estonia 117 33.7 10 5.8 2.4 4.4 0.8 1.6 3.6 26.8 14.8

Greece 226 55.2 4.8 2.7 0.3 0.6 0 0.5 0.6 34.1 3.5

Spain 361 40.2 4.7 8.2 2.9 0.8 0.1 4.6 2.8 35.7 2.1

France 335 39.7 2.1 8.2 0.9 0.7 0.8 5.5 0.8 35.6 8.2

Ireland 155 77.3 20.9 31.5 5.4 19.5 12.9 10.5 6.6 9.7 6.5

Italy 328 15.7 5.6 2 0.9 0.5 0.3 1.2 0.3 47.8 27.1

Cyprus 129 40.3 6.9 9.1 3.5 1.8 0 1.8 0.1 34.1 10.1

Latvia 140 55 1.5 5.1 0.8 0.7 2 3.5 0.1 41.2 4.8

Lithuania 143 35.6 6 11.6 1.4 5.7 2.1 1.4 4.7 24.3 14.5

Luxembourg 127 31.7 3.8 10 0 0 0 2.2 0 45.4 10.9

Hungary 202 17.4 3 3.6 4.1 2 1.7 0.1 9.8 51.2 8.9

Malta 110 7.6 1.9 5.6 2.4 0.5 0 3.7 0 50.4 31.7

Netherlands 196 38.6 10.5 10.2 2 1.8 0.4 1.5 4.2 28.3 7.9

Austria 216 82.5 3.4 2.1 0.3 2.2 0.4 1.8 1.1 8.7 2.2

Poland 359 44.6 12.2 15.7 0.4 1.8 0.6 1.8 1.2 23.4 4.7

Portugal 232 28.9 3.4 1.8 0 0.4 0.4 15.6 0.5 45.1 5.9

Romania 210 25.2 3.9 5.5 3.2 1.1 0.5 2.4 1.9 46.8 11.7

Slovenia 135 57.6 7.3 2.2 1.5 2.4 0 2.7 0 24.4 2.8

Slovakia 192 18 2.8 10.5 2.3 2.7 0.9 4.6 2 43.1 19

Finland 230 59.3 2.7 1.8 0.4 0 0.5 0.6 3.3 27.7 5.8

Sweden 215 17 14.1 5.3 0.2 0.1 0 0 0 51.1 12.1

United Kingdom 317 73.2 27.6 28 3.3 13.9 8.3 12.3 4.7 5.5 10.7

Norway 127 36.7 2.4 1.1 0 2.1 2.1 1 1.6 53.4 0

Iceland 134 65.6 9.3 2.1 0 3.9 2.2 0.2 2.3 7.3 13.7


page 210

Table 63b. Reasons for not using ADR mechanisms – by segments

QUESTION: A22a_01-99. Why have you not used ADR?


Base: retailers who did not use ADR in the past two years

To

tal

N

Yo

u w

ou

ld b

e p

rep

are

d

to u

se A

DR

bu

t th

ere

ha

s n

ever

bee

n a

ne

ed

Yo

u d

id n

ot

kn

ow

AD

R

wa

s a

va

ila

ble

in

yo

ur

cou

ntr

y f

or

yo

ur

sect

or

Yo

u d

id n

ot

feel

su

ffic

ien

tly

in

form

ed

a

bo

ut

the

AD

R p

roce

ss

Yo

u d

id n

ot

tru

st t

he

AD

R p

roce

ss

AD

R i

s to

o t

ime

con

sum

ing

AD

R i

s to

o e

xp

ensi

ve

Yo

u p

refe

rred

to

re

solv

e th

e m

att

er i

n

cou

rt

AD

R i

s n

ot

av

ail

ab

le i

n

yo

ur

cou

ntr

y f

or

yo

ur

sect

or

Oth

er

DK

/NA

EU27 5818 48.4 8.9 10 1.7 4.1 2.8 5 2.5 27.8 9.3

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5056 48.3 9 9.8 1.8 4.1 2.9 5.1 2.4 28.1 9.4

50-249 employees 661 49.9 7.9 11 0.8 4.1 2 4.3 3.2 25.4 8.3

250+ empolyees 97 40.9 7.9 12.7 2.6 3.5 2 7.5 1.3 28.3 12.4



558 46 3.5 10.4 2 2.9 2.2 5.8 2.1 28.3 8.6


4845 50.2 9.6 10.1 1.6 4.5 3 5.3 2.5 27.6 8.2



4023 51.6 9.8 11.4 1.8 4.8 3.4 5.8 3 24.8 8.6


1726 41.2 6.6 6.6 1.3 2.2 1.6 3 1.3 34.7 10.9



1451 54.9 7.1 10.2 1.8 4.1 2.6 5.5 2 24.7 5.6

Domestic sales only 4201 46.1 9.7 10 1.7 4 2.8 4.7 2.7 29.2 10.2



2029 54.8 9.5 10.3 2 5.4 3.4 5.3 3.8 24.7 6.9


3534 44.4 8.5 10 1.6 3.4 2.5 4.7 1.7 29.9 10.4


Fully informed 1291 47.8 7.4 8.2 1.3 3.8 2.7 5.5 3.3 27.4 10.3

Well informed 3507 48.9 7.8 8.6 1.6 3.2 2.6 4.6 2.3 29.4 8.5


962 47.9 14.6 18.1 2.5 7.6 2.9 5.6 2.2 23.3 9.7


page 211

Table 64a. Outcome of the most recent ADR case – by country

QUESTION: A22b. What was the outcome of your last ADR case?

Base: retailers who used ADR in the past two years

Total N

% The dispute was

settled

% The ADR took a

decision/ opinion but

you decided to go to court

% The ADR took a

decision/ opinion but

the consumer decided to go to court

% The ADR took a

decision/ opinion but you did not

comply and the consumer did not go to court

% DK/NA

EU27 551 76 4.4 4.9 4.7 10.1

COUNTRY

Belgium 20 21.4 11.7 12.6 0 54.3

Bulgaria 27 89.9 0 0 0 10.1

Czech Rep. 25 78.1 3.4 0 6.7 11.8

Denmark 49 95.5 0 0 1.9 2.6

Germany 38 83.9 0 3.8 8.8 3.5

Estonia 14 74.4 20 0 0 5.7

Greece 11 83 11.7 0 5.3 0

Spain 34 86.7 0 0 0 13.3

France 32 69.8 4 12.7 1.9 11.5

Ireland 17 92.5 0 0 0 7.5

Italy 17 76.5 18.7 0 0 4.8

Cyprus 10 48.2 17.7 0 0 34.2

Latvia 5 40.2 33.2 0 23.6 3.1

Lithuania 11 68.6 3.6 0 27.8 0

Luxembourg 11 52.5 0 8.7 22.7 16.1

Hungary 19 75.4 4.6 10.7 0 9.3

Malta 23 84.9 2.5 0 5.3 7.3

Netherlands 26 58 13.3 10.9 7 10.8

Austria 20 88.6 0 0 3.5 7.9

Poland 27 86.9 6.6 0 0 6.6

Portugal 18 47.4 0 0 47.6 4.9

Romania 14 75.7 14.2 0 0 10.1

Slovenia 11 87.9 4.5 0 0 7.7

Slovakia 19 79.4 13.6 0 0 6.9

Finland 11 87.2 0 0 0 12.8

Sweden 7 48.8 0 0 10.8 40.4

United Kingdom 31 64.7 6.4 10.4 2.3 16.2

Norway 3 0 0 0 0 0

Iceland 9 73.7 0 0 0 26.3


page 212

Table 64b. Outcome of the most recent ADR case – by segments

QUESTION: A22b. What was the outcome of your last ADR case?

Base: retailers who used ADR in the past two years

Total N

% The dispute

was settled

% The ADR took a

decision/ opinion but you decided

to go to court

% The ADR took a

decision/ opinion but the

consumer decided to go

to court

% The ADR took a decision/

opinion but you did not comply

and the consumer did not go to court

% DK/NA

EU27 551 76 4.4 4.9 4.7 10.1

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 432 75.4 5 4.9 4.7 10

50-249 employees 88 79.4 2.6 6.2 5.2 6.6

250+ empolyees 29 75.8 1.3 0 0 22.8



74 67.8 12.6 3.3 3.3 13


435 75.9 3.3 5.4 5.4 10



425 72.7 5.2 5.5 4.8 11.8


123 86.9 1.7 2.9 4.3 4.2



147 73.7 7.7 4.5 6.1 8




293 73.3 4.6 5 6.4 10.7


246 79.8 4.3 5 2.5 8.4


Fully informed 157 76.1 5.4 1.1 3.3 14.1

Well informed 319 76.1 4.5 5.4 6.2 7.8


73 75.2 1.7 10.9 1.3 10.8


page 213

Table 65a. Have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers? – by country

QUESTION: A23. In the past two years, have you been to taken to court to settle disputes with consumers?

To

tal

N

% Y

es,

by

in

div

idu

al

con

sum

ers

% Y

es,

by

a g

rou

p o

f co

nsu

mer

s a

s p

art

of

a c

oll

ecti

ve

cou

rt

case

% Y

es,

by

a

rep

rese

nta

tiv

e b

od

y

(i.e

. co

nsu

mer

o

rga

nis

ati

on

or

na

tio

na

l a

uth

ori

ty)

as

pa

rt o

f a

co

llec

tiv

e co

urt

ca

se

% N

o

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 6.2 0.5 0.2 91.3 1.7

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 8.6 4.1 1 80.3 6

Bulgaria 250 5 0.1 0.2 92.5 2.2

Czech Rep. 250 6.6 0 0 88.6 4.8

Denmark 253 7.6 0 0 92 0.4

Germany 401 9.8 0.3 0 89.1 0.7

Estonia 150 6.3 0 0.5 93 0.2

Greece 250 3.5 0 0 93.6 2.9

Spain 400 5.1 0.4 0 93.9 0.6

France 400 6.9 0.7 0.9 89 2.5

Ireland 200 7.2 0.1 0.4 90.4 1.9

Italy 400 5 0 0 92.8 2.1

Cyprus 150 5.1 1.2 0.6 91.6 1.5

Latvia 150 3.6 0 0 95.4 1.1

Lithuania 200 5.5 0 0.3 84.3 9.8

Luxembourg 150 5.8 1.1 1.1 89.4 2.6

Hungary 253 6.8 0.8 1.2 90.9 0.3

Malta 150 8.9 2.1 0.3 86.1 2.5

Netherlands 250 7 2.4 0.1 86.9 3.5

Austria 250 10.7 0 0 86.6 2.7

Poland 400 5.3 0.5 0 93.6 0.6

Portugal 257 10.2 3.4 0.2 85 1.2

Romania 250 3 0.5 0.6 94.3 1.6

Slovenia 150 17.8 0.6 0 80.9 0.6

Slovakia 250 9.7 1.4 0.9 82.6 5.3

Finland 252 1.2 0 0 98.5 0.3

Sweden 250 4.2 0 0.1 93.6 2.1

United Kingdom 401 2.1 0.1 0 96.6 1.2

Norway 200 3.4 0 0 95.7 0.9

Iceland 150 2.9 0 0 95.5 1.6


page 214

Table 65b. Have you been taken to court to settle disputes with consumers? – by segments

QUESTION: A23. In the past two years, have you been to taken to court to settle disputes with consumers?

To

tal

N

% Y

es,

by

in

div

idu

al

con

sum

ers

% Y

es,

by

a g

rou

p o

f co

nsu

mer

s a

s p

art

of

a

coll

ecti

ve

cou

rt c

ase

% Y

es,

by

a

rep

rese

nta

tiv

e b

od

y (

i.e.

co

nsu

mer

org

an

isa

tio

n

or

na

tio

na

l a

uth

ori

ty)

as

pa

rt o

f a

co

llec

tiv

e co

urt

ca

se

% N

o

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 6.2 0.5 0.2 91.3 1.7

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 5.6 0.4 0.2 92.5 1.2

50-249 employees 817 9.4 0.7 0.1 86 3.7

250+ empolyees 151 12.6 2.7 1.8 73.2 9.7



722 7.6 1.9 0.4 87.4 2.7


5692 6.2 0.3 0.2 91.9 1.3




1994 5.2 0.3 0.1 92.6 1.8





Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 8 0.8 0.1 89.6 1.5


4098 5.4 0.4 0.2 92.8 1.2


Fully informed 1574 8.4 0.6 0.1 88.8 2.1

Well informed 4168 5.9 0.6 0.1 91.9 1.4



page 215

Table 66a. Retailers prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through... – by country

QUESTION: A24. Would you prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through …?

To

tal

N

% I

nd

ivid

ua

l A

DR

% C

oll

ecti

ve

AD

R

% I

nd

ivid

ua

l co

urt

p

roce

edin

gs

% C

oll

ecti

ve

cou

rt

pro

ceed

ing

s

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 34.8 13 13.7 5.5 33

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 19.5 7.7 24.7 3.6 44.5

Bulgaria 250 44 21.2 4.3 0.7 29.8

Czech Rep. 250 49.9 17.8 6.4 1.3 24.7

Denmark 253 44.3 9.9 14.5 5.2 26.1

Germany 401 42.2 18.2 12.7 6.8 20.1

Estonia 150 69.8 2.4 4.5 0.5 22.7

Greece 250 44.7 18.2 7.9 7.6 21.6

Spain 400 34.2 17.1 20.8 6.2 21.6

France 400 35.8 7.7 17.4 6.2 33

Ireland 200 46.1 16.7 8.3 2 26.9

Italy 400 8.2 8.2 17.8 11.7 54

Cyprus 150 30 6.7 6.6 6.6 50

Latvia 150 34.8 5.9 10.6 1.4 47.4

Lithuania 200 46.1 4.8 9 1.1 39

Luxembourg 150 32.7 8 17.2 2.4 39.7

Hungary 253 74.5 8.7 1.9 0.2 14.6

Malta 150 48.2 7.4 17.6 4.2 22.5

Netherlands 250 22.5 12.2 10.9 15 39.3

Austria 250 50.8 20.5 5.8 2.1 20.8

Poland 400 51.8 10.4 14.2 2.6 21

Portugal 257 24.7 30.4 10.4 1.4 33

Romania 250 40 6.8 16.5 2.6 34.2

Slovenia 150 39 21.9 7.9 4.8 26.5

Slovakia 250 27.6 10.5 18.7 2.7 40.5

Finland 252 31.2 9.8 7.7 2.2 48.9

Sweden 250 20.1 16.2 7.5 3.1 53.1

United Kingdom 401 30.1 8.3 11.2 2.5 47.8

Norway 200 43.8 30.7 4.3 1.3 19.9

Iceland 150 29.8 17.5 4.8 7.7 40.1


page 216

Table 66b. Retailers prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through... – by segments

QUESTION: A24. Would you prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem through …?

To

tal

N

% I

nd

ivid

ua

l A

DR

% C

oll

ecti

ve

AD

R

% I

nd

ivid

ua

l co

urt

p

roce

edin

gs

% C

oll

ecti

ve

cou

rt

pro

ceed

ing

s

% D

K/N

A

EU27 6970 34.8 13 13.7 5.5 33

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 34.6 13.1 13.5 5.4 33.3

50-249 employees 817 36.7 11.6 15.4 6.4 29.9

250+ empolyees 151 30.3 15.9 10.9 5.2 37.6



722 33.6 14.2 16.2 3.5 32.5


5692 34.9 13.3 14 5.8 32.1




1994 34.9 13.3 11.3 6.1 34.4







4098 32.6 12.5 15.4 5.7 33.7


Fully informed 1574 32 12.2 13.9 3.6 38.4

Well informed 4168 35.3 14.2 14 5.7 30.8



page 217

Table 67a. Estimated number of (un)safe non-food products – by country

QUESTION: A25. Thinking about all non-food products currently on the market in your country, do you think

that...?

Total N

% Essentially

all products

are safe

% A small

number of

sproducts are

unsafe

% A significant

number of

products are

unsafe % DK/NA

EU27 6970 17.5 61.2 16.3 5

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 38.7 46.4 5.3 9.6

Bulgaria 250 3.4 52.3 35.8 8.4

Czech Rep. 250 11.8 63.8 17.4 7

Denmark 253 28.5 52.9 11.2 7.5

Germany 401 12.9 65.4 19.4 2.2

Estonia 150 25.2 66.5 4.5 3.9

Greece 250 6.5 48.7 38.4 6.4

Spain 400 20.6 59.9 17.2 2.3

France 400 21.4 54.4 21.5 2.7

Ireland 200 23.2 64.9 5.7 6.2

Italy 400 16.3 54.3 20.8 8.6

Cyprus 150 7.6 62.5 27.4 2.5

Latvia 150 3.5 71.2 16.9 8.4

Lithuania 200 12.4 66.2 13.8 7.6

Luxembourg 150 42.8 43.6 10.7 3

Hungary 253 11.5 66.1 12.6 9.8

Malta 150 15.1 68.7 7.2 9

Netherlands 250 18.1 69.7 5 7.3

Austria 250 18.9 69.2 8.2 3.7

Poland 400 10.8 68.6 15.1 5.5

Portugal 257 20.9 60.9 13.5 4.6

Romania 250 5 42.4 47.1 5.5

Slovenia 150 2 83.9 11.4 2.7

Slovakia 250 11.2 65.7 14.4 8.7

Finland 252 40.8 57.9 0.9 0.4

Sweden 250 15.9 74.8 6 3.3

United Kingdom 401 21.8 65.8 5.1 7.2

Norway 200 28.6 66 4.7 0.7

Iceland 150 15.9 73.9 5.1 5.2


page 218

Table 67b. Estimated number of (un)safe non-food products – by segments

QUESTION: A25. Thinking about all non-food products currently on the market in your country, do you think

that...?

Total N

%

Essentially

all products

are safe

% A small

number of

sproducts

are unsafe

% A significant

number of

products are

unsafe

%

DK/NA

EU27 6970 17.5 61.2 16.3 5

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5997 17.7 61 16.2 5

50-249 employees 817 16 61.6 18 4.4

250+ empolyees 156 16.5 63.9 12.9 6.7



722 19.8 62.4 12.8 5


5692 16.8 61.8 16.6 4.8




1994 18.4 58.8 18.5 4.3







4098 16 60.3 18.8 4.9


Fully informed 1574 18.4 58.6 16.6 6.4

Well informed 4168 17.6 62.1 15.5 4.7

Less than well informed 1149 15.1 62 18.9 3.9


page 219

Table 68a. Are companies a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or commercial issues for your sector / market? – by country

QUESTION: A26. Are you a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or commercial

issues for your sector / market?


EU27 6970 36.4 58.8 4.8

COUNTRY

Belgium 253 58.8 38.8 2.4

Bulgaria 250 51.3 40.5 8.1

Czech Rep. 250 67.5 24.3 8.2

Denmark 253 52 43.9 4.1

Germany 401 41 55.2 3.8

Estonia 150 30.9 62.2 6.9

Greece 250 17.5 74.6 7.8

Spain 400 37.4 59.5 3.1

France 400 21.2 77.5 1.3

Ireland 200 51.2 41.8 7.1

Italy 400 14.4 81.2 4.4

Cyprus 150 13.9 83.2 3

Latvia 150 11.8 88 0.1

Lithuania 200 6.4 90.6 3.1

Luxembourg 150 32.8 65.8 1.4

Hungary 253 59.9 30.5 9.6

Malta 150 41.2 50.2 8.6


Austria 250 50.4 47 2.6

Poland 400 5 89.9 5.2

Portugal 257 35 63.8 1.3

Romania 250 12 86.4 1.5

Slovenia 150 24.6 72.7 2.7

Slovakia 250 64.6 23.4 12.1

Finland 252 33.1 54.1 12.8

Sweden 250 41.8 54.3 4


Norway 200 21.4 74.4 4.2

Iceland 150 42.3 51.9 5.9


page 220

Table 68b. Are companies a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or commercial issues for your sector / market? – by segments

QUESTION: A26. Are you a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or commercial

issues for your sector / market?


EU27 6970 36.4 58.8 4.8

COMPANY SIZE

10–49 employees 5995 35.6 59.9 4.5

50-249 employees 817 40.7 53.6 5.8

250+ empolyees 151 43 44.4 12.6



722 43.1 51.3 5.6


5692 36 59.5 4.5




1994 31 65.6 3.4





Adhere to a code of conduct 2536 100 0 0


4098 0 100 0


Fully informed 1574 47.5 47.7 4.7

Well informed 4168 35.8 60 4.2



page 221

II. Survey details

This Flash Eurobarometer 278 “Business attitudes towards enforcement and redress in the internal

market” was conducted on behalf of the DG SANCO of the European Commission (Health and

Consumer Protection Directorate, Directorate for Consumer Affairs – B1 Consumer Markets). The

objective of the survey was to collect policy-relevant information about business attitudes towards

enforcement and redress in the internal market, covering legislation dealing with the economic

interests of consumers and product safety.

Telephone interviews were conducted between the 16st

and 30th July 2009 and between 24 and 28

August by partner institutes of the Gallup Organisation Hungary :

Belgium BE Gallup Europe (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Czech Republic CZ Focus Agency (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Denmark DK Hermelin (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 28/08/2009)

Germany DE IFAK (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Estonia EE Saar Poll (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Greece EL Metroanalysis (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Spain ES Gallup Spain (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

France FR Efficience3 (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Ireland IE Gallup UK (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Italy IT Demoskopea (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Cyprus CY CYMAR (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Latvia LV Latvian Facts (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Lithuania LT Baltic Survey (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Luxembourg LU Gallup Europe (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Hungary HU Gallup Hungary (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Malta MT MISCO (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Netherlands NL MSR (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 28/08/2009)

Austria AT Spectra (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Poland PL Gallup Poland (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Portugal PT Consulmark (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Slovenia SI Cati d.o.o. (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 28/08/2009)

Slovakia SK Focus Agency (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Finland FI Norstat Finland Oy (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Sweden SE Hermelin (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

United Kingdom UK Gallup UK (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Bulgaria BG Vitosha Research (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Romania RO Gallup Romania (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)

Norway NO Fieldwork Scandinavia (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 28/08/2009)

Iceland IS IGM (Interviews : 16/07/2009 – 30/07/2009)


page 222

Representativeness of the results

The target group for this Flash Eurobarometer was defined as companies employing 10 or more

people, operating in the 27 Member States of the EU, in Iceland or Norway.

The lists of companies qualified to be interviewed were developed by Dun and Bradstreet. Where the

D&B database had a poor coverage (especially in the New Member States) the sample lists were

developed by national institutes using local statistical data sources. The survey sample was selected

randomly but disproportionally, according to two criteria: company size (2 categories: 10-249

employees, 250+ employees) and activity sector.

Within the employment size the size of the categories was defined in advance (10-249 employees:

90%; 250+ employees: 10%), but the selection of companies by the activity categories was made at

random.

Target group of the survey was SMEs in the retail and service sector. The sampling frame (as

developed by D&B) covered those companies in sectors that were considered to be likely to have

significant retail activity and be able to sell via distance sales channels. For example, in the NACE-

sector “G – Wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles, motorcycles and personal and

household goods”, companies in the sub-category “51 – Wholesale trade and commission trade, except

of motor vehicles and motorcycles” were excluded. For more details on the final distribution of

companies across their largest sales‟ product category, see annex tables 6a and 6b.

Weighting

The total sample was distributed between sampling “cells” (as defined above) in a way that does not

follow the actual distribution of businesses within the coverage zone: e.g. larger businesses were

intentionally “over-sampled” in order to get enough cases in these low incidence cells as well, for

meaningful results in each sample segment.

During data processing, each cell in the cross distribution of the sample was re-weighted (up or down)

according to its actual, empirically verified known weight within the survey region. Thus, the total

results presented are not affected by over- and under-sampling, and are representative of the total

universe examined – both for country-level as well as global (e.g. EU27) estimations. Country weights

for global estimations were developed on the basis of the size of the universe in each country.

The person interviewed in each company was at top managerial /commercial position. The interviewers

checked the identity of this person as well as the accuracy of the enterprise sampling characteristics, as

delivered by sample list, namely: the number of employees and the activity of the company.


page 223

Sizes of the samples

The targeted number of main interviews was 400 in Germany, Spain, France, Poland, United

Kingdom; 200 in Lithuania, Ireland, and in Norway; 150 interviews was in Estonia, Republic of

Cyprus, Latvia, Malta , Slovenia and Iceland; in the other countries the target was 250 interviews .

Total interviews

conducted

Total interviews

conducted

TOTAL 7320

Belgium 253 Malta 150

Czech Republic 250 Netherlands 250

Denmark 253 Austria 250

Germany 401 Poland 400

Estonia 150 Portugal 257

Greece 250 Slovenia 150

Spain 400 Slovakia 250

France 400 Finland 252

Ireland 200 Sweden 250

Italy 400 UK 401

Cyprus 150 Bulgaria 250

Latvia 150 Romania 250

Lithuania 200

Luxembourg 150 Norway 200

Hungary 253 Iceland 150

Questionnaires

The questionnaire prepared for this survey contained two parts: the company information and the

question regarding the main questionnaire.

The institutes listed above translated the questionnaire to their respective national language(s) using a

centralized process of back-translation procedure, involving two initial local translations, independent

back-translation and central verification of the localised questionnaires.

Sampling error

Surveys are designed and conducted to provide an estimate of a true value of characteristics of a

population at a given time. An estimate of a survey is unlikely to exactly equal the true population

quantity of interest for a variety of reasons. One of these reasons is that data in a survey are collected

from only some – a sample of – members of the population, this to make data collection cheaper and

faster. The “margin of error” is a common summary of sampling error, which quantifies uncertainty

about (or confidence in) a survey result.

Usually, one calculates a 95 percent confidence interval of the format: survey estimate +/- margin of

error. This interval of values will contain the true population value at least 95% of time.

For example, if it was estimated that 45% of EU citizens/respondents are in favour of a single

European currency and this estimate is based on a sample of 100 EU citizens/respondents, the

associated margin of error is about 10 percentage points. The 95 percent confidence interval for

support for a European single currency would be (45%-10%) to (45%+10%), suggesting that in the EU

the support for a European single currency could range from 35% to 55%. Because of the small

sample size of 100 EU citizens/respondents, there is considerable uncertainty about whether or not the

citizens/respondents of the EU support a single currency.


page 224

As a general rule, the more interviews conducted (sample size), the smaller the margin of error. Larger

samples are more likely to give results closer to the true population quantity and thus have smaller

margins of error. For example, a sample of 500 will produce a margin of error of no more than about

4.5 percentage points, and a sample of 1,000 will produce a margin of error of no more than about 3

percentage points.

Margin of error (95% confidence interval)

Survey

estimate

Sample size (n)

10 50 100 150 200 400 800 1000 2000 4000

5% 13.5% 6.0% 4.3% 3.5% 3.0% 2.1% 1.5% 1.4% 1.0% 0.7%

10% 18.6% 8.3% 5.9% 4.8% 4.2% 2.9% 2.1% 1.9% 1.3% 0.9%

25% 26.8% 12.0% 8.5% 6.9% 6.0% 4.2% 3.0% 2.7% 1.9% 1.3%

50% 31.0% 13.9% 9.8% 8.0% 6.9% 4.9% 3.5% 3.1% 2.2% 1.5%

75% 26.8% 12.0% 8.5% 6.9% 6.0% 4.2% 3.0% 2.7% 1.9% 1.3%

90% 18.6% 8.3% 5.9% 4.8% 4.2% 2.9% 2.1% 1.9% 1.3% 0.9%

95% 13.5% 6.0% 4.3% 3.5% 3.0% 2.1% 1.5% 1.4% 1.0% 0.7%

(The values in the table are the margin of error – at 95% confidence level – for a given

survey estimate and sample size)

The examples show that the size of a sample is a crucial factor affecting the margin of error.

Nevertheless, once past a certain point – a sample size of 800 or 1,000 – the improvement is small. For

example, to reduce the margin of error to 1.5% would require a sample size of 4,000.


page 225

III. Questionnaire

B. Screeners

B1. Does your company sell directly to final consumers?

- Yes ............................................................................................................. 1

- No .............................................................................................................. 2

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

[IF NOT YES, INTERVIEW TO BE TERMINATED]

B2. How many employees do you have in your company?

- …. Employees

- [DK/NA] .............................................................................................. 9999

[IF LESS THAN 10, INTERVIEW TO BE TERMINATED]

C. Demos / background

C1. What was your companies‟ turnover in 2008? (Or if possible from the database)

- …. €

- Refusal ................................................................................................. 8888

- [DK/NA] .............................................................................................. 9999

C2. Do you have a legal service or a lawyer in your company?

- Yes ............................................................................................................. 1

- No .............................................................................................................. 2

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

C3. Which of the following sales channels do you use?

- In-premises sales ........................................................................................ 1

- Internet ....................................................................................................... 2

- Phone ......................................................................................................... 3

- Post ............................................................................................................ 4

- Doorstep selling ......................................................................................... 5

- Other out-of-premises channels ................................................................. 6

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9


page 226

C4. Which of the following product categories is the largest in your sales? (If not available

through the NACE code)

- Food and drinks ......................................................................................... 1

- Clothing, footwear and accessories (including jewellery and

cosmetics) .................................................................................................. 2

- Furniture, furnishings and decoration (including do-it-yourself

goods and maintenance products) .............................................................. 3

- Household appliances, electronic goods and information

technology goods ....................................................................................... 4

- Leisure goods (ex. books, audiovisual material, toys…) ........................... 5

- Cars, motor vehicles and parts ................................................................... 6

- Other goods................................................................................................ 7

- Financial services ...................................................................................... 8

- Telecommunications services .................................................................... 9

- Energy or transport services .................................................................... 10

- Hotels and restaurants .............................................................................. 11

- Other services .......................................................................................... 12

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................. 99

C5. In how many EU countries outside [YOUR COUNTRY] do you have subsidiaries or retail

outlets?

- ……. Countries

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................. 99

C6. To how many EU countries do you currently make cross-border sales to final consumers?

In our definition, a cross-border sale is a sale by phone, post or e-commerce or by a home visit to

a final consumer (i.e. the general public) resident in a different EU Member State from that of

the seller. The origin of the products sold is not relevant. Of prime importance is that the final

customer is resident in a different EU country from the seller, when the transaction takes place.

Sales in shops to people from another EU country, who are on holidays or on a shopping trip, do

not qualify as cross-border transactions.

- I sell only to consumers in [COUNTRY] .................................................. 0

- ……. Countries

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................. 99

C7. If the provisions of the laws regulating transactions with consumers were the same

throughout the 27 Member States to how many EU countries would you be interested in making

cross-border sales to final consumers?

- None, we have no interest in cross-border sales ........................................ 0

- …….. Countries

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................. 99


page 227

A. Proposed questions for 2009 questionnaire

Before the interview starts, explain to interviewees that:

“Consumer legislation” should be understood as legislation dealing with the economic interests

of consumers which does not include product safety. When questions relate to product safety, it

will be explicitly stated.

“Product safety” relates to consumer products only and does not include industrial products,

nor food. Unsafe products are failing to comply with safety standards, not rifles or knives.

“Consumer authorities” are national, regional and local public authorities carrying out market

surveillance activities and other activities designed to ensure compliance with consumer and

product safety legislation.

Information & awareness of legal obligations towards consumers

TREND

A1. How well informed are you about your legal obligations towards consumers arising from

consumer legislation in your country?

By consumer legislation we mean legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers

which does not include product safety. When questions relate to product safety, it will be

explicitly stated.

All responses are strictly anonymous.

- Fully informed ........................................................................................... 1

- Well informed ............................................................................................ 2

- Not well informed ..................................................................................... 3

- Not informed at all ..................................................................................... 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A2. And how well informed do you think consumers are about their rights arising from

consumer legislation in your country?

- Fully informed ........................................................................................... 1

- Well informed ............................................................................................ 2



- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

MODIFIED TREND

A3. How well are you informed about the legislation on product safety?

By „Product safety‟ we mean issues relating to consumer products only and not including

industrial products, nor food. By unsafe products we mean products that are failing to comply

with safety standards, not products that are not safe by their nature like rifles or knives.

- Fully informed ........................................................................................... 1

- Well informed ............................................................................................ 2



- Not relevant because you don‟t sell products ........................................... 5

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9


page 228

TREND

A4. Do you know where you can find or get relevant information and advice about consumer


[READ OUT - MULTIPLE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]

- Yes, with regard to legislation in my own country .................................... 1

- Yes, with regard to legislation in other EU countries ................................ 2

- [Yes, mentioned the European Consumer Centre specifically] ................. 3

- No, neither for my country nor for other EU countries ............................ 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A5. In the past two years, have you actively searched for information or advice on consumer

legislation (for example by contacting the consumer authorities in writing or by phone or by

searching on websites?)

- Yes ............................................................................................................. 1

- No, I already have this information, there was no need to

search for it ................................................................................................ 2

- No, because I did not need this information ............................................. 3

- No, because I don‟t know where to get this information ........................... 4

- No, although such information would be useful ........................................ 5

- No, for other reasons ................................................................................ 6

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

Knowledge of consumer legislation

NEW

A6.

IF COUNTRY= FR, PL, CY, CZ, DK, EE, FI, LV, PT, SE, MT, SI, NO, IS

With respect to distance selling, that is when a product is purchased on the internet, phone or

post, what is the length of the cooling-off period in your country?

How many CALENDAR days is it?

………..Calendar days

IF COUNTRY= AT,BE, BG, ES, IE, LT, LU, NL, SK, UK, HU, EL,IT, RO



How many WORKING days is it?

………..Working days

IF COUNTRY=DE



How many weeks is it?

………..Weeks

The cooling off period is the legal right of a consumer to return a product purchased on the internet,

phone or post within a certain period without paying a penalty.


page 229

NEW

A7. Please complete the following statement correctly.

The consumer has the right to ask for a defective product to be replace or repaired... (To be

adapted nationally)

- Within 1 year from the date of the original purchase or .......................... 1

- Within 2 years from the date of the original purchase or .......................... 2

- Within minimum 2 years from the date of the original purchase

and longer for some specific products? ..................................................... 3

- [None of the above] ................................................................................... 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

[REPLACE OPTION 2 IN UK (EXCEPT SCOTLAND) AND IE:

- Within 6 years from the date of the original purchase

[REPLACE OPTION 2 IN SCOTLAND:

- Within 5 years from the date of the original purchase

NEW

A8. Please state whether the following commercial practices are prohibited or not [IN YOUR

COUNTRY]?

- Prohibited................................................................................................... 1

- Not prohibited ............................................................................................ 2

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

A. Including an invoice or a similar document seeking payment in marketing

material. ................................................................................................................... 1 2 9

B. Advertising products at a very low price compared to other offers without

having a reasonable quantity of products for sale. ................................................... 1 2 9

C. Making exaggerated statements in an advertisement. ............................................... 1 2 9

D. Describing a product as „free‟ although it is only freely available to

customers calling a premium rate phone number. ................................................... 1 2 9

NEW

A9. Please indicate whether the following statements related to product safety are correct or

not?

- Correct ....................................................................................................... 1

- Not correct ............................................................................................... 2

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

A. Upon the authorities‟ request, retailers must cooperate with the authorities

to prevent risks posed by products which they supplied. ......................................... 1 2 9

B. Retailers must immediately notify the authorities about any unsafe

product they are selling. ........................................................................................... 1 2 9

C. Retailers must immediately recall unsafe products from their customers. ............... 1 2 9

D. Retailers should disclose to the authorities contact details of producers /

importers of unsafe products. ................................................................................... 1 2 9


page 230


NEW

A10. In the past twelve months, have you come across fraudulent advertisements, statements or

offers made by your competitors?

Fraudulent advertisements attempt to obtain money without selling anything.

- Yes, on several occasions ......................................................................... 1

- Yes, once or twice ..................................................................................... 2

- No ............................................................................................................. 3

- [Not applicable] ......................................................................................... 8

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A11. In the past twelve months, have you come across misleading or deceptive advertisements,


Misleading or deceptive advertisements are advertisements which contain false information or

present factually correct information in a misleading manner about the goods or services to be

sold.


- Yes, once or twice ..................................................................................... 2

- No .............................................................................................................. 3

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A12. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors knowingly sold any unsafe

products?


- Yes, once or twice ..................................................................................... 2

- No .............................................................................................................. 3

- Not relevant because I don‟t sell products ................................................. 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A13. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors tried to unduly coerce or



- Yes, once or twice ..................................................................................... 2

- No .............................................................................................................. 3

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9


page 231

NEW

A14. In the past twelve months, are you aware that your competitors used what you regard as

unfair consumer contract terms?

Unfair contract terms are terms which cause a significant imbalance in the parties‟ rights and

obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.


- Yes, once or twice ..................................................................................... 2

- No .............................................................................................................. 3

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A15. Now, thinking about all legislation dealing with the economic interests of consumers, please

say whether you strongly agree – agree – disagree – strongly disagree with the following

statements.

Let me confirm once more that all responses are strictly anonymous.

- Strongly agree ............................................................................................ 1

- Agree ......................................................................................................... 2

- Disagree ..................................................................................................... 3

- Strongly disagree ....................................................................................... 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

A. You comply with consumer legislation. ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 9

B. Your competitors comply with consumer legislation. ........................................ 1 2 3 4 9


page 232

NEW CORE

A16. In relation to consumer legislation, did any of the following take place in the past two

years?

(Multiple answers possible, to be adapted for Finland, Germany and Austria)

- Yes ............................................................................................................. 1

- No .............................................................................................................. 2

- [Not applicable] ......................................................................................... 8

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

A. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a

general control concerning your national sales ..................................................... 1 2 8 9

[IF COUNTRY IS NOT AT OR DE]

B1. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a

specific control concerning your national sales .................................................... 1 2 8 9

[IF COUNTRY IS AT OR DE]

B2. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer

organisations in the context of a specific control concerning your national

sales


C1. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the

consumer authorities ............................................................................................. 1 2 8 9


C2. One of your competitors has been the subject of a control by the

consumer authorities or by consumer organisations.

D. You have been informed by the consumer authorities (or by consumer

organisations) that they consider you are breaching consumer legislation.

For example, in a meeting or telephone call with an official, by sending

you a letter or email notifying non-compliance with legislation, by taking

you to court, or through an injunction. ................................................................. 1 2 8 9

E. One of your competitors has been informed by the consumer authorities

(or by consumer organisations) that they consider your competitors are

breaching consumer legislation. ........................................................................... 1 2 8 9

F. You have been sanctioned by a self-regulatory body for not respecting the

agreed codes of conduct / codes of practice .......................................................... 1 2 8 9

G. You have learned through the media about a breach of consumer

legislation in your market. .................................................................................... 1 2 8 9

H. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the framework of a

general control concerning your cross-border sales .............................................. 1 2 8 9


I1. You were contacted by the consumer authorities in the context of a

specific control concerning your cross-border sales ............................................. 1 2 8 9


I2. You were contacted by the consumer authorities or by consumer

organisations in the context of a specific control concerning your cross-

border sales

J. You were contacted by an ECC concerning a specific consumer complaint .......... 1 2 8 9


page 233

MODIFIED TREND CORE

A17. In relation to product safety, did any of the following take place in your firm the past two

years?

- Yes ............................................................................................................. 1

- No .............................................................................................................. 2

- [NOT RELEVANT, DON‟T SELL PRODUCTS].................................... 8

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

A. You received consumer complaints about the safety of any of the products

you sold ................................................................................................................. 1 2 8 9

B. The authorities checked the safety of any of the products you were selling .......... 1 2 8 9

C. The authorities asked you to withdraw or recall any of the products you

were selling ........................................................................................................... 1 2 8 9

D. The authorities asked you to issue a public warning about the safety of

any of the products you were selling .................................................................... 1 2 8 9

E. You, as a retailer, carried out any tests to make sure that any of the

products you were selling were safe ..................................................................... 1 2 8 9

F. Other action (spontaneous) ..................................................................................... 1 2 8 9

A18. The following statements relate to monitoring compliance with consumer and product

safety legislation. Please say whether you strongly agree – agree – disagree – strongly disagree

with the following statements.

- Strongly agree ............................................................................................ 1

- Agree ......................................................................................................... 2

- Disagree ..................................................................................................... 3

- Strongly disagree ....................................................................................... 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

A. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with

consumer legislation in my sector in my country. ............................................. 1 2 3 4 9

B. The public authorities actively monitor and ensure compliance with

product safety legislation in my sector in my country. ...................................... 1 2 3 4 9

C. Consumer NGOs actively monitor compliance with consumer legislation

in my sector in my country. ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 9

D. The self-regulatory bodies actively monitor respect of codes of conducts

or codes of practice in my sector in my country. ............................................... 1 2 3 4 9

E. The media regularly report on businesses which do not respect consumer

legislation. .......................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 9

F. I changed my commercial practices as a result of a media story. ....................... 1 2 3 4 9


page 234

Complaints

NEW

A19. What were the main issues consumers complained about in the past twelve months?

[OPEN ENDED WITH PRECODING - Multiple answers possible]

- Quality of the product (or service) ............................................................. 1

- After sales or redress ................................................................................. 2

- Delivery, provision, installation (including customer service) .................. 3

- Price, tariff, invoice or bill ......................................................................... 4

- Contract terms or guarantees ..................................................................... 5

- Misleading advertisement, aggressive selling or fraudulent

practices ..................................................................................................... 6

- Lack of clear information .......................................................................... 7

- Incidence related to unsafe products or services ....................................... 8

- Ethical or environmental aspects ............................................................... 9

- Privacy issues .......................................................................................... 10

- Difficulties in switching / changing provider .......................................... 11

- Others....................................................................................................... 12

- None ........................................................................................................ 98

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................. 99

NEW

A20. What percentage of complaints you received in the past twelve months could you resolve

directly with the consumer to their satisfaction?

- …. %

- [DK/NA] ................................................................................................ 999

Redress

TREND

A21. In the past two years, have you used Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms

(i.e. arbitrators, mediators, ombudsmen, conciliation bodies, consumer complaints boards, other

out-of-court dispute resolution bodies) to settle disputes with customers? (Multiple answers

possible, To be adapted for Finland)

- No, and I do not know any of those mechanisms ...................................... 1

- No, but I know some ADR mechanisms ................................................... 2

- No, but I am member of an ADR body .................................................... 3

- Yes, I have used ADR mechanisms ........................................................... 4

- Yes, I regularly use those mechanisms ...................................................... 5

- Yes, through the ADR body I am a member of ......................................... 6

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9


page 235

[IF A21=NO]

NEW

A22a. Why have you not used ADR?

READ OUT – ROTATE - Multiple answers possible

- You would be prepared to use ADR but there has never been a

need ............................................................................................................ 1

- You did not know ADR was available in your country for your

sector .......................................................................................................... 2

- You did not feel sufficiently informed about the ADR process ................ 3

- You did not trust the ADR process ............................................................ 4

- ADR is too time consuming ...................................................................... 5

- ADR is too expensive ................................................................................ 6

- You preferred to resolve the matter in court .............................................. 7

- ADR is not available in your country for your sector ................................ 8

- Other .......................................................................................................... 9

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................. 99

[IF A21=YES]

NEW

A22b. What was the outcome of your last ADR case?

- The dispute was settled .............................................................................. 1

- The ADR took a decision/opinion but you decided to go to

court ........................................................................................................... 2

- The ADR took a decision/opinion but the consumer decided to

go to court .................................................................................................. 3

- The ADR took a decision/opinion but you did not comply and

the consumer did not go to court ............................................................... 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

[ASK ALL]

NEW

A23. In the past two years, have you been to taken to court to settle disputes with consumers?

[ONLY ONE ANSWER IS POSSIBLE]

- Yes, by individual consumers .................................................................... 1

- Yes, by a group of consumers as part of a collective court case ............... 2

- Yes, by a representative body (i.e. consumer organisation or

national authority) as part of a collective court case ................................. 3

- No .............................................................................................................. 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A24. Would you prefer to settle a dispute with a group of consumers over the same problem

through …?


- Individual ADR or ..................................................................................... 1

- Collective ADR or ..................................................................................... 2

- Individual court proceedings or ................................................................. 3

- Collective court proceedings? .................................................................... 4

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9


page 236

Others

A25. Thinking about all non-food products currently on the market in your country, do you

think that…?


- Essentially all products are safe ................................................................. 1

- A small number of sproducts are unsafe .................................................... 2

- A significant number of products are unsafe ............................................. 3

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

NEW

A26. Are you a member of a code of conduct or code of practice related to consumer or

commercial issues for your sector / market?

- Yes ............................................................................................................. 1

- No .............................................................................................................. 2

- [DK/NA] .................................................................................................... 9

business attitudes towards enforcement and redress in...

Documents