information request on complaint handling in...

Complaint handling in Europe

EASA Info Request

Information request on complaint handling in Europe

Requested by: SEE, GR April 2015

Background The Greek SRO, SEE, would like to know the complaint handling procedures and in particular

the level of fees in the case of competitor complaints.

Questions

Please describe your complaint handling procedure.

Answers

1. AUSTRIA

2. BELGIUM

3. BULGARIA

4. CYPRUS

5. CZECH REPUBLIC

6. FINLAND

7. FRANCE

8. GERMANY-DW

9. GERMANY-WBZ

10. GREECE

11. HUNGARY

12. IRELAND

13. ITALY

14. LITHUANIA

15. LUXEMBOURG

16. NETHERLANDS

17. POLAND

18. PORTUGAL

19. ROMANIA

20. SLOVAKIA

21. SLOVENIA

22. SPAIN

23. SWEDEN

24. SWITZERLAND

25. TURKEY

26. UK


EASA Info Request

Country Consumers Competitors Charges for Competitor Complaints

AT Yes Yes Free of charge

BE Yes No

BG Yes Yes Free of charge

CY Yes Yes A fee of 600 EUR (non-members)

CZ Yes Yes Free of charge

FI Yes Yes A fee of 2,000-2,500 EUR

FR Yes Yes Free of charge

DE-DW Yes Yes Free of charge

DE-WBZ Yes Yes Free of charge

GR Yes Yes A fee of 750 EUR

HU Yes Yes Free of charge

IE Yes Yes Free of charge

IT Yes Yes A fee of 3,500 EUR + VAT (IAP members) and 4,000 EUR + VAT (non-members)

LT Yes Yes A fee of 290 EUR

LU Yes No

NL Yes Yes A fee of 1,000 EUR (a company or a professional body) SRC members whose annual membership fee is less than 1,000 EUR pay 250 EUR; whereas if their annual membership fess exceeds 1000 EUR, the complaint is handled free of charge

PL Yes Yes A fee of 5,000 PLN + VAT (non-members, approx. 1,200 EUR)

PT Yes Yes A fee of 850 EUR (ICAP members) and 1,500 EUR (non-members)

RO Yes Yes Free of charge

SK Yes Yes Free of charge

SI Yes Yes Free of charge

ES Yes Yes A fee varies on the ad spend and a category of business (advertisers, agencies, business associations, media) The 2015 level of fees is available here

SE Yes Yes A fee can be imposed if an extensive enquiry is needed (e.g. when external expertise such as legal or expert advice is needed and needs to be paid for)

CH Yes Yes A fee of CHF 500 (approx. €450)

TK Yes Yes A fee of 2,000 TL + VAT (agencies, media and others; approx. 700 EUR) and 4,000 TL + VAT (advertisers; approx. 1,400 EUR)

UK Yes Yes Free of charge

http://www.autocontrol.es/pdfs/ficha_socio_ingles.pdf


EASA Info Request

AUSTRIA

The Austrian SRO, ÖWR, restructured its complaints system in 2008 and now handles

complaints from both consumers and competitors free of charge within six working days.

Complaints must be submitted in writing or via the on-line complaint form on the ÖWR

website, with an explanation of the grounds for the complaint and a description or example

of the offending advertisement.

A “Small Senate” composed of three members from the Secretariat previews the complaints.

If the complaint is within the remit of the ÖWR, the advertiser and the agency responsible are

informed, and invited to respond within three working days. The media concerned are also

informed.

If the advertiser and/or agency offers to amend or discontinue the advertisement, the ÖWR

informs all the parties concerned.

If the advertiser and/or the agency declines to amend or discontinue the advertisement, or if

they fail to respond within the prescribed period of time, the complaint will be forwarded to

the Council (i.e. the Complaints Committee). The Council, which is split into three panels of

approximately 72 members each, takes a decision by simple majority after online

consultations within three working days. The panels have alternating responsibility for

complaints. In case of complex complaints of consequence, there is a possibility to involve the

entire Council to achieve a broader base for the decision. If the complaint is upheld, the ÖWR

General Assembly has to confirm the decision within 24 hours, after which the

advertiser/agency, the complainant and the Chamber of Commerce are informed. Decisions

are also published on the ÖWR website.

ÖWR will not handle complaints regarding advertising that is already the subject of a judicial

procedure. Complaints that fall outside the ÖWR’s remit are forwarded, whenever possible,

to the relevant public authorities, with whom co-operative relationships are maintained.

BELGIUM

The Belgian SRO, JEP, handles complaints from the public (i.e. consumers, consumer

organisations, public authorities and professional associations) free of charge. Advertising

complaints from competitors or other advertisers are not within JEP’s remit and are handled

by the court.

After receiving a complaint the advertiser is contacted and normally invited to respond within

three to five working days. The complainant’s identity is not disclosed. The case is then

referred to the Jury who decides whether the advertisement contravenes the law and/or the

self-regulatory codes and rules and, if it does, whether it should be modified or withdrawn.

The complaints procedure normally takes 7 to 14 days and, if necessary, the Jury may seek


EASA Info Request

expert advice. Both advertisers and complainants may appeal against the decision of the

Complaints Jury within five working days of the original decision. The appeal will be upheld if

the Complaints Jury’s decision is shown to have been contrary to legal or self-regulatory

principles, or if the prescribed procedure was not followed.

BULGARIA

The Bulgarian SRO, NCSR, handles complaints from consumers, competitors and state bodies.

In all cases this service is provided free of charge.

NCSR will reject a complaint if it considers that it does not fall within the remit of the Code

and will inform the complainant accordingly. If the complaint does fall within the remit of the

Code, the advertiser and/or agency is invited to comment within one week. After one week,

the case will be considered by the NCSR’s Jury who will take a decision on it. The complainant

and the advertiser and/or agency are informed of the decision of the SRO and, if a complaint

is upheld the advertiser responsible is given a deadline by which they must amend or

discontinue the advertisement. All adjudications are published on the NCSR’s website. The

complaint adjudication process typically takes 30 days. Both the complainant and the

advertiser can submit appeal in case of new evidences or procedural omissions.

CYPRUS

The Cypriot SRO, CARO, accepts complaints submitted by any person who has a legitimate

interest, such as consumers or consumer groups, Industry competitors, advertising agencies,

etc. The Manager of CARO can also file an own-initiative complaint.

Complaints by consumers and/or consumer groups are handled for free. The members of the

associations that support CARO and media members may also file a predetermined number

of complaints without any charge. Companies that are not part of the system need to pay a

fee of 600 EUR in order to able to lodge a complaint with First Instance. However, some

companies may choose to lodge the complaint through their advertising agency if that agency

is a member of CARO. In such a case, the complaint would either not be charged (it would fall

in the agency’s number of allotted complaints) or CARO would apply a fee of € 200 if the

agency has exceeded its allotted number.

Complaints must be sent in writing. Most complaints are filed through the electronic form on

our website. However, one may also send an email, a letter by post, etc. If the complaint is

submitted by a consumer, a standard practice is not to reveal consumer information to

advertisers unless we have the express consent of the consumer involved.

All complaints that are deemed of substance are examined by the First Instance Committee.

First Instance Committee meets within three working days of the complaint being sent to the

advertiser.


EASA Info Request

Each party may be represented by maximum four persons at the discussion of the case. Each

party has 20 minutes to state its case initially and then 10 more minutes to respond to the

other side’s comments. Alternatively, a written memo may be filed. CARO management may

also allow a party (especially a consumer) to participate in the proceedings via teleconference,

etc. After the parties leave, the Committee debates and takes a decision which is sent to the

parties within two working days. It is then uploaded on the website of CARO. On average,

length of handling a complaint is up to ten days.

CARO has a fast track procedure to deal with urgent complaints. In the fast track procedure,

the First Instance Committee meets during the next working day after the complaint is sent

to the advertiser. Fast track procedure will be put into effect in one of two situations:

a) The Manager of CARO together with two Board members that do not have a conflict

of interest are of the opinion that the complaint/ad complained about, refer to

dangers for consumer health and safety, a shocking insult to public feeling or bring

advertising into disrepute.

b) Crisis situation: during 60 days there have been at least five complaints for different

advertisements about products/services of the same industry. In this situation, it is up

to the Board to decide that complaints will be dealt using the fast track procedure and

all decisions will be issued within 24 hours and will be immediately enforceable (no

grace period).

All Committee decisions are published. Complaints that are resolved informally and/or are

not investigated e.g. because they are out of remit, are not published.

Parties may appeal to the Review Committee within 15 working days of being informed of the

First Instance Committee decision; however, the Review Committee will not discuss any case

where there has not been compliance with the First Instance Committee decision.

Review Committee meets within five working days of the application for review being sent to

the parties. Each of the parties may ask for the meeting to be postponed and a new date to

be set, but only once. Chairman or Vice-Chairman decides on this and the new meeting date

must then be set within maximum three working days of the previous date.

In terms of procedure and timeframe to modify an ad, the same apply as with the First

Instance Committee. Decisions however, may be sent to the parties within three working

days.

CZECH REPUBLIC

The Czech SRO, CRPR, accepts complaints from members of the public and companies,

including CRPR’s members. CRPR may also investigate cases on its own initiative, arising from

its monitoring activities. Having received a complaint, the CRPR Secretariat invites comments


EASA Info Request

from the advertiser and/or advertising agency concerned. The case is then submitted to the

Arbitration Committee, which reaches a decision; the parties concerned are then informed.

All complaints are handled free of charge.

CRPR always requires that consumer complainants provide their name and mailing address

to process the complaint. CRPR never provides this information to the advertiser involved in

case of consumer complaint. Only in case of a trade complaint, CRPR provides the identity of

complainants to the advertiser.

The Jury meets once a month to adjudicate cases. Decisions are communicated within two to

three working days of the monthly meeting – accordingly the complaints-handling process

may take between two days and four weeks, depending on when the complaint is filed.

In urgent cases, the Arbitration Committee communicates by e-mail. Using this fast track

procedure, it takes the Committee two to three days to reach an adjudication.

FINLAND

In Finland, MEN (Council of Ethics Advertising) considers issues regarding the ethical

dimension of advertisements, whereas LTL (Board of Business Practice) deals with business-

to-business disputes about unfair commercial practices.

The Finnish SRO, MEN (Council of Ethics in Advertising), handles complaints from consumers,

companies, associations, submitted in writing free of charge. A charge between 2,000 and

2,500 EUR is levied if the complainant is a company. The complaint is then sent to the

advertiser concerned, who is invited to provide a written comment within two weeks. MEN

secretary then prepare a written decision on the basis of the complaint and the advertiser’s

response. MEN’s decisions are not legally binding. The average timeframe for complaint

adjudication is between one and two months. MEN will reconsider a decision if new facts or

circumstances come to light. Appeals are handled free of charge and within a time frame

depending on the individual case.

The Finnish SRO, LTL (Board of Business Practice), handles complaints from consumers and

competitors submitted in writing, by post or by e-mail. In case of a competitor complaint,

there is a fee between 2,000 and 2,500 EUR to be paid by the complainant. The complaint is

then sent to the advertiser concerned for a written response, which is required within two

weeks. Afterwards, LTL reviews the complaint and sends its decision to both parties.

FRANCE

The French SRO, ARPP, deals with complaints from both consumers and competitors. These

complaints are handled free of charge by the Jury de Déontologie Publicitaire (JDP –

Advertising Standards Jury), composed entirely of members that are independent from the

advertising industry.


EASA Info Request

Complaints should be addressed to the Jury in writing, or via the online complaint form on

the Jury’s website (www.jdp-pub.org), if possible together with a copy of the offending

advertisement. If, on examination, an infringement is apparent, the advertiser is invited to

substantiate his claims. If he cannot do so, he is asked to modify them to comply with the

rules, or to cease publication of the advertisement. On average, a complaint adjudication

takes one month.

ARPP does not accept anonymous complaints. It requires the complete name, email and

address of the complainant in order to process the complaint.

When the complainant is a private person, his identity isn’t given to the involved advertiser

under any circumstance. The information is provided when the complainant is an association,

for example, a consumer association.

JDP gives opinions, all of which are regularly published. Their publication is indexed according

to a gradation on the gravity of the offense and the response by the professional (depending

on whether or not to accept to withdraw or amend its advertising):

a) The first level of publication is posting the notice on the dedicated website of JDP;

b) The second level of publication is sending a press release, quoting the brand of the

advertiser and the name of the agency responsible of the breach;

c) In cases where the violation of ethical rules is particularly serious, the publication of

an article in the press can be decided.

An appeal against the opinions of the JDP has been provided for in Article 22 of the Rules and

Regulations of the JDP. It allows all parties to request the jury to review his opinion.

According to the procedure, any advertiser, agency, media or complainant can appeal the

opinion that JDP gave against him:

a) In case of new element (s), not known, on the date of JDP gave his opinion.

b) If the proceedings before the jury was not conducted in accordance with Chapter D of

the JDP Rules and Regulations.

This request does not have suspensive effect of the opinion of the JDP. If a request of appeal

is filed against an opinion, the information is mentioned with the opinion published on the

website. The appeal must be made within one month of the date of receipt of the JDP opinion.

Publication of a revised opinion is dealt with under the same conditions than for the first

opinion. There is no fee for filing a complaint.


EASA Info Request

GERMANY-DW

The German SRO, DW, deals with issues of social responsibility as well as taste and decency.

DW handles complaints from both competitors and consumers free of charge.

If the complaint regards taste and decency or social responsibility, the DW’s Secretariat first

decides whether it is of substance. The Secretariat will reject any complaint which it considers

to be without substance and the complainant can appeal against this decision. The advertiser

or agency may offer to withdraw or amend the advertisement. If the advertiser or agency

disputes the complaint, the case is considered by the members of the DW’s Jury and an

opinion is issued, usually in writing. Decisions are taken by simple majority of votes.

On average, a complaint adjudication takes between one and two weeks.

GERMANY-WBZ

The German SRO, WBZ, is a self-regulatory body which enforces Unfair Competition Law,

whose status is civil law. In principle it has no statutory power, but like any other competitor

or authorised organisation, WBZ is entitled to exercise its right to forbearance under the

Unfair Competition Law.

Complaints, stating the identity of the complainant, should be submitted in writing, together

with a copy of the offending advertisement or an exact description of the allegedly unfair

marketing practice. Complaints can also be submitted online, using the complaint form on the

website.

The complainant may be a competitor, a consumer or a public authority. Complaints are

handled free of charge. The complainant’s identity is treated in the strictest confidence.

WBZ decides whether or not the complaint is of substance. As it enforces the Unfair

Competition Law, whose status is civil law, the WBZ does not ‘adjudicate’, but gives its legal

opinion of the case. If it considers the complaint to be of substance, the WBZ writes to the

advertiser or agency, asking them to sign a written undertaking to amend or discontinue the

advertising. This formal obligation contains a contractual penalty clause; in case of non-

compliance, the advertiser or the agency has to pay a penalty. Legal action is threatened in

the case of non-compliance.

If the advertiser or agency declines to amend or discontinue the advertisement, the WBZ may

institute legal proceedings for unfair competition before the civil courts. Two possible ways

can be chosen:

a) In urgent cases, WBZ can claim a preliminary court injunction prohibiting the unfair

commercial practice. The court will normally issue the preliminary injunction within a


EASA Info Request

day by immediate order. In the case of contravention, the court can charge the

opponent with an administrative fee of up to 250,000 EUR.

b) WBZ may also initiate main proceedings in court. The party that loses the case must

pay all costs, including the court as well as the solicitor’s fees for both parties. Both

parties can appeal against a court’s decision. The complaint may also be referred to

the Board of Conciliation of the Chamber of Commerce. The result of the complaint is

communicated to the member complainant. In several cases court decisions are

published.

On average, an advertisement or unfair commercial practice is withdrawn or amended within

one to two weeks of the complaint being received. If WBZ seeks a preliminary injunction

before the civil courts, a settlement can be achieved within a day by immediate order. If main

court proceedings are initiated, the dispute may take a year or more, depending on whether

a party appeals against the decision.

GREECE

The Greek SRO, SEE, handles complaints from both consumers and competitors. Competitors

are charged 750 EUR, while consumer and consumer organisations complaints are handled

free of charge. Complaints must be in writing and include the identity of the complainant,

details of the offending advertisement and an indication of the rules of the Code which have

allegedly been breached. Complaints can be filed by mail, fax or post.

In the case of consumer complaints, SEE requires at least the name and address of the person

making the complaint and a telephone number in order to be able to contact them for any

further information or clarification that may be needed regarding their complaint. Also

requires a written description of their complaint (brief or detailed).

SEE always asks complainants whether they wish to reveal their identifying information to any

third parties involved in the process and if not, they do not provide their information. When

contacting the advertising agency and/or the company involved, they forward the written

complaint in its original form, making sure that all other details (including the mail address)

are concealed.

SEE believes that upon receiving a complaint, the important issue is – and should remain –

the complaint itself and not so much the identity of the complainant. Therefore the

complaints are accepted and processed in order to examine their validity - and the contact

details they require are in order to facilitate the process of the complaint and not to ‘verify’

the identity or the motivation of the complainant.

If a complaint is not admissible, the complainant is informed and the case is closed. If a case

is considered to be of substance, the parties are invited to a meeting with the First Degree


EASA Info Request

Committee (i.e. the complaints committee). If they cannot or do not want to attend, they can

send their opinions and views in writing, addressing the Committee.

The parties are asked to bring to the meeting the allegedly offending material as well as any

other relevant data to support their case. The advertiser must be able to substantiate any

claims made in the advertisement. Representatives of the parties state their case in person.

In cases where insufficient evidence is available, the Committee may seek independent expert

advice. Experts are restricted to advising on specific matters within their competence.

The decision is communicated to the parties concerned in writing, along with the reasons for

it and reference to the relevant articles of the Code. Decisions take immediate effect although

a period of grace may be granted to allow amendments to be made, provided the

advertisement does not endanger consumer health or safety or provoke widespread public

disapproval. This period of grace may vary according to the media (e.g. seven days for

television, two days for radio) and the nature of the modifications required, but under no

circumstances may it exceed 30 days.

A fast track procedure is adopted in cases involving a threat to consumer safety or health, the

likelihood of grave offence to public feeling, the risk of bringing advertising into disrepute, or

in flagrant cases of misleading advertising. In these circumstances, the parties are summoned,

in writing, to a First Degree Committee meeting which takes place within a maximum two

days of notification. If a party is unable to attend the meeting, broadcast of the advertising

has to be suspended. The procedure is otherwise the same as the standard procedure.

The average time between receipt of a complaint and notification of the decision is seven

days, while the fast track procedure takes two to three days.

HUNGARY

The Hungarian SRO, ÖRT, handles complaints from both consumers and competitors free of

charge. Complaints must be submitted in writing, with an explanation of the grounds for the

complaint and a description or example of the advertisement considered to be in breach of

the Code. Complaints can be sent by e-mail or via the online complaint form on the ÖRT’s

website. Complainants are always asked to provide full information in order to process the

complaint. The information is, however, not passed on to the advertisers.

ÖRT informs the advertiser concerned of the complaint, the advertiser is asked to respond

within five days, The ÖRT then makes a decision. In the case of consumer complaints, the

identity of the complainant is kept confidential.

In case of a competitor complaint, the parties are first encouraged to reach an agreement.

Provided this agreement is acceptable to ÖRT, the case is then settled informally. If the parties

are unable to agree, ÖRT convenes a meeting, attended by both parties, and makes a ruling.

If the case requires it, ÖRT can seek the opinion of specialists and experts.


EASA Info Request

Typically a complaint is adjudicated within two weeks, if no further information is required

for the ÖRT to reach a decision.

IRELAND

The Irish SRO, ASAI, handles complaints from any public or private person or body, including

consumers and competitors. All complaints are handled free of charge. Complaints must be

submitted in writing (via post, fax, email or the online complaints form) and accompanied by

a copy or description of the advertisement, with details of where and when it appeared. The

identity of individual complainants remains confidential. In case of competitor complaints,

complainants must agree to their identity being disclosed and confirm they are not taking

action via any other forum. They may be asked for detail as to the evidence of their complaint

(which consumer complaints are not required to do).

Complaints are first assessed to determine whether they fall within the terms of reference of

the ASAI’s Code. The ASAI’s Secretariat may request information from the advertiser at this

stage, prior to a formal investigation.

If the ASAI’s Secretariat considers that there is a prima facie case, the advertiser or agency is

informed and invited to comment within ten days. The ASAI’s Secretariat can, however, ‘fast-

track’ a case if it considers that it is necessary. This would happen only in serious cases.

Depending on the advertiser’s response, the ASAI’s Secretariat may settle the case informally

or prepare a recommendation for the Complaints Committee. In the latter case, a copy of a

recommendation is sent to the complainant and to the advertiser/agency, who have an

opportunity to comment on it before adjudication. The case is then considered by the

Complaints Committee, which decides whether or not the Code has been contravened. The

identity of individual complainants (but not of competitor complainants) remains

confidential.

A complaint will not normally be considered if it is the subject of legal action or has been

referred to the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission or another regulatory

agency.

On average, cases that are considered by the Jury take three and a half months. Cases

completed informally will normally be finalised in a much shorter period. The investigation

procedure may be speeded up if necessary and in particularly serious cases the Secretariat

may require interim action, including immediate amendment or withdrawal of an

advertisement or promotion pending completion of the investigation. All parties are advised

of the Complaints Committee’s final adjudications.

Reviews can be requested only by one of the parties involved in the original complaint. For

consumer appellants, there is a nominal charge of 30 EUR; in the case of advertisers the fee


EASA Info Request

is 5,000 EUR and in the case of charitable organisations, the fee is 2,000 EUR. These charges

are reimbursed if the decision is reversed, or substantially altered in favour of the appellant.

ITALY

The Italian SRO, IAP, accepts complaints from individual consumers, consumer associations

or public bodies, which must be submitted in writing, are initially considered by the

Advertising Review Board (composed entirely of non-industry stakeholders such as academics

and experts). The Advertising Review Board also considers cases arising from the monitoring

process in which there is a clear prima facie breach of the Code. This service is provided free

of charge.

The Italian SRO, IAP, requires name and email address when a complainant fills in the online

complaint form. The address is also needed in case the complaint is sent by post. The SRO

provides the information to the advertiser only with the prior consent of the complainant.

If a complaint or monitoring identifies a clear breach of the Code, the Review Board may

instruct the advertiser to change the advertisement. In the case of a flagrant breach, it may

summarily order the advertisement’s immediate withdrawal. The Review Board’s order,

together with a brief rationale, is sent immediately to the parties concerned, who may contest

it within ten days. If the order is not contested within this period, it acquires the status of an

adjudication. If it is contested, the case is referred to the Jury. If the complaint raises a serious

issue of public offence or involves complex matters in the assessment of evidence, the Review

Board may refer it directly to the Jury.

Competitor complaints are immediately referred to the Jury, as are appeals against orders of

the Advertising Review Board. There is a fee for competitor complaints. It amounts to 3,500

EUR + VAT for IAP members and 4,000 EUR + VAT for non-members. The level of rates is

available on the IAP website. The Jury also considers cases requiring further investigation that

have been referred to it by the Advertising Review Board.

When a case is received by the Jury, which is composed entirely of non-industry stakeholders

such as academics and experts, its President convenes a hearing before the Jury,

concentrating primarily on aspects which cannot be dealt with satisfactorily in writing. Parties

may be assisted or represented by lawyers and/or experts. An appointed member of the

Review Board participates in the proceedings for the specific purpose of protecting the

interests of consumers and of advertising in general. If need be, the Jury may consult experts

for advice on specific issues. These experts may participate in a hearing, but do not have

voting rights.

After the hearing, the Jury, provided it considers that the case has been sufficiently discussed,

reaches a decision. A summary of the Jury’s judgement is immediately sent to the parties

concerned. As soon as possible, the Jury’s full judgement is passed to the Secretariat, which

forwards copies to the parties concerned and to other interested organisations. If the Jury

http://www.iap.it/le-attivita/per-le-aziende/tariffe/

http://www.iap.it/le-attivita/per-le-aziende/tariffe/


EASA Info Request

finds a breach of the Code, the parties concerned (including the media) are obliged to

withdraw the advertisement immediately. The average time between the submission of a

case and a decision by the Jury is 20 days.

LITHUANIA

The Lithuanian SRO, LRB, accepts both consumer and competitor complaints. Complaints

from consumers and members are handled free of charge, however, competitor complaints

from non-members are subject to a fee, 290 EUR.

Complaints must meet the following criteria: the complaint must be in writing; it must be

possible to identify the complainant; the complainant's contact information must be included;

the complainant’s concerns with the advertisement must be clearly stated; if the complaint

relates to broadcasting (i.e. television, radio or film), it is necessary to specify where and when

the ads were shown/broadcast; if the complaint concerns signs, posters or other outdoor

advertising, it must indicate the nature of the text; if it is printed advertising, please attach a

copy; if possible, specify the name of the advertiser, address and telephone/fax number.

Once a complaint has been received, the advertiser is contacted and is given ten days to

respond. After receiving the response, the nine-member Arbitration Committee considers the

case and reaches a decision. Once a decision has been taken, both the complainant and the

advertiser are informed. The adjudication process typically takes up to two months. The

Lithuanian self-regulatory system currently has no appeals procedure.

LUXEMBOURG

The Luxembourgish SRO, CLEP, handles complaints submitted by consumers regarding the

content of any type of advertising, including public service advertising. Complaints need to

include the full name and address of the complainant as well as details or, if possible, a copy

of the advertisement, and the reasons why it is thought to be in breach of the Code. The name

and other data of the complainant are normally not transmitted to the advertiser. Anonymous

complaints are not accepted. CLEP does not deal with competitor complaints, which in

Luxembourg fall under legal jurisdiction.

A complainant receives an acknowledgement within ten days. If the complaint is within CLEP’s

remit, both the advertiser and agency are asked to respond to the complaint. Any response

received is taken into account when the Commission meets to adjudicate on the complaint.

The complaints procedure takes on average 15 days.

NETHERLANDS

The Dutch SRO, SRC, handles complaints about the content of an advertisement coming from

any member of the public, including companies and professionals bodies. Complaints are


EASA Info Request

handled free of charge, except for cases filed on behalf of a professional body or a company,

for which a fee of 1000 EUR is charged. There are two exceptions to this rule:

a) if the complainant is an SRC member whose annual membership fee exceeds 1000

EUR, the complaint is handled free of charge,

b) if the complainant is an SRC member whose annual membership fee is less than 1000

EUR, the charge for complaint handling is 250 EUR.

Complaints should be submitted using the electronic form on the website or in writing via

post and provide details of the offending advertisement, the reasons why it is thought to be

in breach of the Code and, if possible, a copy of it.

An initial assessment is carried out, to determine whether the complaint is of substance. Not

every admissible complaint is handled by the entire Advertising Code Committee. The

chairman of the Committee can set aside a complaint if he feels that the Committee will not

upheld the complaint. An appeal against this decision (direct chairman’s dismissal) can be

lodged with the entire Advertising Code Committee within 14 days.

A complaint considered to be of substance is first forwarded to the advertiser concerned, who

is invited to comment within 14 days. After this period, a copy of any response received is

sent to the complainant. Upon receipt of the defence or if the advertiser does not wish to

conduct a defence, the chairman may decide to assess the complaint himself. He can reject

or upheld the complaint. An appeal against this decision can be lodged with the entire

Advertising Code Committee within 14 days.

If the chairman himself does not decide on the case, the plenary Committee will assess the

complaint in a hearing arranged at the offices of SRC, where each party is invited to state its

case, although parties may also do so in writing. A written ruling by the Committee is on

average issued within two weeks of the hearing. The average time to process a case is one to

three months. There is a fast track procedure to deal with urgent cases within 14 days.

The identity of the complainant is always disclosed to the advertiser, but is not published in

the final ruling that is made available on the website of SRC.

POLAND

The Polish SRO, RR handles complaints from both consumers and competitors. Consumer

complaints are handled free of charge, as are complaints lodged by a member, but complaints

by a company not in membership of the SRO are subject to a fee of 5,000 PLN + VAT

(approximately 1,200 EUR). Consumer complaints can be submitted through an on-line form

on the RR’s website or by sending a standard mail or fax.

RR requires complainants to provide full name and addresses in order to proceed. One of the

main reasons is to avoid conflict of interests between complainants and arbiters. It is also


EASA Info Request

important to inform the complainant regarding the progress on the case and contact her/him

in case additional clarification or data is required.

RR never discloses personal information to the involved advertiser also because they have

strict law on protecting personal data. In cases where the advertiser wanted to apologise

personally to the person that have submitted a complaint, RR takes care of forwarding this

message.

Upon receiving a complaint (with the necessary details to identify the advertisement in

question) RR asks the advertiser concerned for a formal response within 14 days. After this

period the case is referred to a Working Group of the Committee of Advertising Ethics, which

delivers an adjudication within ten days. The Committee of Advertising Ethics has 30 members

and is divided into ten Working Groups of three members each. These are appointed by each

sector of the industry tripartite (media, agencies, advertisers).

The Committee of Advertising Ethics may seek expert advice whenever appropriate. RR has a

panel of experts, approved by its Board, but the Committee of Advertising Ethics may consult

an external expert if the case requires it.

On average, a complaint adjudication takes three weeks.

PORTUGAL

The Portuguese SRO, ICAP, handles complaints from competitors (both members and non-

members), consumers, consumer associations, statutory bodies and other interested parties.

For consumers and consumer associations, the service is free of charge and they can submit

a complaint through an on-line form available on the ICAP website, or by downloading the

complaint form and sending it by post, email or fax. For competitor complaints, a fee of 850

EUR is charged for ICAP members and 1.500 EUR for non-members.

The advertiser is invited to respond to the complaint within five working days. Decisions of

the Jury (i.e. the Complaints Committee) take effect immediately and the process, assuming

there is no appeal, normally takes between 10 and 12 working days.

Decisions are binding for ICAP members and all are published on the ICAP website. Non-ICAP

members are not bound by the Conduct Code, but it is strongly recommended that they

follow the decisions and in practice this has, so far, always occurred. If not, ICAP will go to

their media members ask them to stop publishing/broadcasting the advertising.

ROMANIA

The Romanian SRO, RAC, handles complaints related to advertising content submitted by

consumers, competitors and statutory bodies; all complaints are handled free of charge.

Complaints must be made in writing and can be sent by fax, e-mail, post, or via the online


EASA Info Request

complaint form. Complaints must include a clear explanation of the reasons for the complaint,

as well as a detailed description or example of the offending advertisement.

If the complaint is found to be within the remit of the RAC, the advertiser is informed and

invited to respond within two working days. If the advertiser concedes the complaint and

agrees to change or withdraw the advertisement, the case is closed, and all parties are

informed. If the advertiser disagrees or does not respond, the complaint is considered by the

Ethical Committee (i.e. the Complaints Committee) within three working days of receiving the

complaint.

The Ethical Committee is composed of five persons: RAC members and independent

permanent members. RAC members are invited to participate based on their availability and

taking into consideration the obligation not to participate in a meeting of the Ethical

Committee when a conflict of interest with one of the parties occurs. Both parties involved

can present their point of view in front of the Ethical Committee.

The Ethical Committee may seek expert advice; experts are proposed by the Secretariat and

need to be accepted by both parties involved. At the request of the Ethical Committee or of

the parties involved, both parties may be heard by the independent expert, who evaluates

the information presented, submits a report to the Ethical Committee, and subsequently

attends the meeting of the Ethical Committee to give technical support. The expert does not

have the right to vote.

The Ethical Committee takes a decision by a simple majority of votes. Both the complainant

and the advertiser are informed of the decision. If the complaint is upheld, the advertiser is

invited to amend or discontinue the advertisement.

Typically a complaint is resolved within a maximum of four working days.

SLOVAKIA

The Slovak SRO, SRPR, handles complaints from both consumers and competitors free of

charge.

Upon receiving a complaint, the SRPR notifies the parties concerned and requests a formal

response within five days.

In certain cases, if the advertisement is in clear breach of the Code, SRPR may ask the

advertiser to withdraw or change the ad immediately. If the advertiser agrees, the complaint

is resolved informally. If an advertiser does not agree, the complaint will go to the arbitration

committee (complaints committee).

Should SRPR require further information on a specific claim, it can seek the opinion of experts

in the field. A complaint adjudication typically takes 14 days. The press is informed of all


EASA Info Request

decisions and are also published each month in a leading advertising trade publication and on

a special media website with an open discussion forum for each case.

In urgent cases a fast track procedure allows the complaint to be dealt with immediately.

SLOVENIA

The Slovenian SRO, SOZ, accepts complaints by individuals, organisations and companies.

Complaints are handled free of charge.

When the complainant is a consumer, the identity is kept confidential (anonymous complaints

are not accepted).

The Jury, the Advertising Arbitration Court, is required to adjudicate on the complaint within

one month. On average, complaint adjudication takes three to four weeks. However, when

an advertisement is causing serious or widespread offence, SOZ endeavours to get an

adjudication in the shortest time frame possible.

Both the complainant and the advertiser can request the Advertising Arbitration Court to

reconsider its decision. Appeals must be submitted within eight days and are free of charge.

SPAIN

The Spanish SRO, AUTOCONTROL, handles complaints submitted by members and non-

members on advertisements, for AUTOCONTROL’s members and consumers associations.

Consumer complaints are handled free of charge, while a fee is charged in case of competitor

complaints. The fee varies depending on a category of business (advertisers, agencies,

business associations, media) and the ad spend. The 2015 level of charges in available on the

AUTOCONTROL’s website.

Complainants must provide at least their full name, identity card number (DNI) and an email.

Full information regarding the details requested is available on the AUTOCONTROL’s website.

AUTOCONTROL provides the full name and email to the involved advertiser routinely with

complainant consent. In fact those data are included in the complaint text that it is forwarded

to the advertiser. When the complainant fills in the data section they inform the complainant

that they will use those data to deal with the complaint. It is important to point out that

complainant’s data (full name, identity card number, email, address, etc.) are never published

in the Jury’s resolution available to all public.

Upon receiving the complaint, the complaint is forwarded to the advertiser concerned, who

is invited to comment and, where appropriate, produce evidence to substantiate any claims

within a time limit of five working days. If the advertiser agrees in writing to withdraw or

modify the advertisement, the case is closed. If the advertiser declines to withdraw or modify

the advertisement, they can comment within the five-day limit, or simply not respond. The



http://www.autocontrol.es/reclamaciones_online.aspx


EASA Info Request

case is then referred to the Jury, who has the option of consulting external experts if

necessary. The average time for complaint adjudication is 14 days. After the adjudication,

both parties are immediately informed in writing of the Jury’s decision. If either party

disagrees with the decision, it may be appealed within 4 working days. All the adjudications

of the Jury are published in AUTOCONTROL’s monthly newsletter. Latest adjudications are

also available on the AUTOCONTROL’s website, without restriction. Adjudications dating from

more than one year, are kept in the database, available to members only.

SWEDEN

The Swedish SRO, Ro., accepts complaints from consumers, competitors and other interested

parties. Consumer complaints are always handled free of charge, but if an extensive inquiry

is needed (e.g. when external expertise such as legal or expert advice is needed and needs to

be paid for), Ro. may require the complainant to pay a fee and only if the complainant is a

corporation. The complainant will be notified if a fee is necessary, and may decide to

withdraw the complaint. So far (as of February 2015), Ro. has not dealt with a case in which

the complainant was requested to pay a fee.

Complaints must be made in writing, either via the online complaints form on Ro. website, or

by mail. They should contain the complainant’s name, e-mail or mail address. The Ro. does

not accept anonymous complaints. The complainant should also include information about

where the advertisement was published, the product or service advertised, when the

advertisement was seen, the reason for the complaint and who the advertiser is. If the ad has

been published in print or on the Internet the complainant must attach a copy of the ad.

Ro. always requires complainants to provide their full names and addresses in order to accept

and process the complaint. The complainants cannot be anonymous to the advertiser, but

only their name is given and they are not mentioned by name in the decision.

Upon receiving a complaint, the Ro.’s Secretariat sends a copy of the complaint to the

advertiser for a comment, and also indicating which ICC rules the advertisement might be

breaching. If there is relevant precedent in the form of a previous adjudication, the

Ombudsman (Ro.) can make a decision. If there is no precedent on the case, it is referred to

the Jury (RON). In this case, the Ro.’s Secretariat submits a written recommendation to RON

for discussion. RON may either accept the recommendation or make a different decision.

If an existing adjudication is relevant to the complaint, Ro. may use it as a precedent. Ro. can

dismiss a complaint if it finds that the complaint does not concern commercial marketing, is

regarding advertising that is more than six months old, if the advertising is not aimed at the

Swedish market, if it concerns the product itself, if it has already been decided in another

authority or if the complaint is unfounded. Appeals can be made to the Jury against any

decision made by Ro.


EASA Info Request

Both parties are informed of the outcome and the decisions are published in full on the Ro.

website. The process takes from one to three months, depending on the complexity of the

case. A fast track procedure is not in place. Where a sectorial self-regulatory body exists, cases

are normally referred to that body. If necessary, cases can be referred to the public official,

the Consumer Ombudsman.

SWITZERLAND

The Swiss SRO, SLK/CSL, handles complaints from both competitors and consumers. All

consumer complaints are handled free of charge. In the case of complaints between

competitors there is an administration charge of CHF 500 (approximately 450 EUR).

Complaints should be submitted in writing to the SLK/CSL’s Secretariat, clearly stating the

grounds for the complaint and enclosing a copy or clear description of the advertisement.

SLK/CSL always requires complainants to provide full information to accept and process a

complaint and routinely provide this information to advertisers without complainant consent.

Upon receiving the complaint, the SLK/CSL’s Secretariat informs the advertiser, who is invited

to comment and submit evidence within 14 days.

The SLK/CSL’s Secretariat can decide to take no further action if the complaint appears to be

unfounded, or if the advertiser agrees to amend the advertisement. In this case, the parties

are informed in writing.

If a complaint is considered to be of substance, and the advertiser disagrees with the

complaint, the case is forwarded to one of the Commission’s Chambers. The Commission is

divided into three Chambers, which act as complaints committees. The Chambers are set up

to speed up the complaints handling process. Each Chamber meets twice a year.

Consequently, the date of receipt determines the Chamber to which a complaint is referred.

All three chambers are – if required – supported by non-voting external experts. The burden

of proof rests with the advertiser. If the case requires it, experts in different disciplines may

join the Chamber, in a solely advisory capacity. It may decide that the Code has been breached

even if the offending advertisement has been discontinued. If the advertiser decides to take

court action, the Commission may choose to suspend the case pending the court’s decision.

After deliberation, the Chamber issues its decision, which is communicated to the parties.

On average, a complaint adjudication takes approximately three months.

TURKEY

The Turkish SRO, RÖK, handles complaints from both competitors, consumers, associations

and NGOs. Consumer complaints and the complaints by the associations and NGOs are

handled free of charge, while competitors are charged a fee (agencies, media and others:


EASA Info Request

2,000 TL + VAT which amounts approximately to 700 EUR; advertisers: 4,000 TL + VAT which

amounts approximately to 1,400 EUR).

Complaints must be in writing, specify the article of the Code which is alleged to have been

breached, and be accompanied by details of the advertisement. Consumers can use the

complaint form available on the website. The competitors, associations and NGOs file their

complaints in written via e-mail, fax or post.

The identity of the complainant is not disclosed unless the complaint is about comparison,

denigration, imitation, exploitation of goodwill.

If the complaint falls within the RÖK’s remit, comments are invited (in written), within two

working days, from the advertiser and/or the advertising agency. If the dispute can be

resolved by discussion between the parties, the written complaint is withdrawn and the RÖK

takes no further action. Otherwise the case is referred, together with the necessary

documentation and the RÖK Secretariat’s recommendation, to the Executive Board (i.e. the

Complaints Committee), which considers it and reaches a decision.

This decision is immediately communicated to both parties in writing. The process, from the

receipt of a complaint in writing to the parties being informed of the Board’s decision,

normally takes between four and seven days.

There is a fast track procedure for handling urgent cases. If an ad is obviously in violation of

the Code and needs to be amended or withdrawn immediately, a decision can be taken

without getting opinion from the advertiser. This sort of decision must be taken unanimously

by the Board. This fast track procedure is handled by taking the opinion of each Executive

Board member via e-mail.

The Board may consult technical experts if necessary, in which case the adjudication time is

prolonged to 15-20 days, to allow time to evaluate scientific reports and test results. Technical

experts are chosen from prestigious state universities.

If a modification is proposed by the advertiser, the modified advertisement is circulated by

mail to the Executive Board members and the parties are informed of the outcome.

Appeals against the decisions of the Executive Board can be made to full Advertising Self-

Regulatory Board, which acts as the Appeal Jury. Decisions of the full Advertising Self-

Regulatory Board can be appealed if only new evidence can be presented. There is no fee for

filing a complaint or an appeal.

The decisions of RÖK are not published, they are only shared with the parties involved.


EASA Info Request

UK

The UK SRO, ASA, accepts complains from competitors, consumers and other interested

parties. The service is free and complaints, with details of the advertisement concerned, can

be submitted online, in writing (post, fax) or by telephone.

ASA has a competitor complaints policy by which advertisers making a complaint about

another advertiser are required to provide evidence that they have tried to resolve their

complaints with their competitor before ASA agrees to take on the complaint.

ASA does require full name and postal address of the complainant before processing a

complaint. The name and email address only are not sufficient. This type of information is

confidential and is not shared with the advertiser – unless the complainant has stated that

with to be a named party, or if the complaint comes from a competitor, pressure group or

other organisation. In these cases, ASA will name the group or organisation who has

complained.

The Executive (i.e. the Secretariat) first assesses the complaint to ascertain whether it

warrants further investigation. If so, the advertiser and/or the agency and, where relevant,

the broadcaster and the pre-clearance body, are informed and asked for written comments,

normally within ten working days.

The Codes require advertisers to hold evidence to support their claims and to make it

available to the ASA without delay.

The advertiser’s comments are evaluated in the light of the complaint. In the case of a minor

infringement, where the advertiser immediately agrees to modify the advertisement, the case

may be closed informally without further action. If the advertiser does not accept that the

Codes have been breached, the Executive submits a draft recommendation to the ASA

Council, which is responsible for the final decision.

The ASA Council, composed of two-thirds lay members and one-third industry

representatives, may seek the advice of independent experts, but the Council is the final

arbiter of whether or not an advertisement is in breach of the rules. If the Council decides

that the advertisement has contravened the Code, the advertiser is asked to amend or

withdraw it and to undertake not to repeat the breach.

Typically, a case is resolved within five days if there is no investigation; ten days if there is

some preliminary work; 25 days if there is no investigation after an ASA Council discussion;

35 days for an informal investigation; 85 days for a standard investigation; and 140 days for a

complex investigation.

All formal and informal rulings are published on the ASA website, every Wednesday.

information request on complaint handling in...

Documents