Recent News From the EU

MEPs approved European Commission proposals to revise EU air passenger rights rules. The text approved by the EP would force airlines to be less restrictive in carry-on baggage policies and would make it harder for airlines to avoid paying compensation for delays and cancellations. The revised rules clarify the term 'extraordinary circumstances', which airlines used to get out of paying compensation for delayed or cancelled flights. 

The text adopted by MEPs would mean personal belongings such as coats, handbags or items purchased at the airport would not count toward their maximum cabin baggage allowance. Also, passengers would be entitled to: €300 for journeys of 3,500km or less which were delayed more than three hours. €400 for journeys between 3,500 and 6,000km which were delayed more than five hours. €600 for journeys of 6,000km or more which were delayed more than seven hours.  

 (From EU News Roundup - the European Movement)

Consumer Advice

Back in the 1970s some councils put resources and great efforts into helping consumers deal with those who would try to fleece them. I believe that that was the right thing to do. If you believe in the positive value of competition - information is key to its effectiveness. Bad traders and scammers get pushed out and honest, reputable businesses that respect their consumers can thrive. {though 'Gresham's law' does note the tendency for the bad to drive out the good - free markets on their own - in practice, don't deliver the access to information needed for markets to function properly}.

Sadly most Trading Standards Departments are a shadow of their former selves - and well resourced, convenient, consumer information centres are now a thing of the past. Sadly the interests of those who would deny information and protection to consumers have triumphed.

Some services are provided by overstretched bodies such as the Citizens Advice Bureaux, and Trading Standards Departments (County or Unitary Authorities) do still exist. Complaints can be made about wrongful behaviour - and I'd urge people not to suffer in silence - but give Trading Standards Departments the information and evidence they need to put bad traders out of business. The Office of Fair Trading can investigate bad practice. You can read how the OFT and Trading Standards departments worked together to deal with bad practice by
Weatherseal
United Carpets Group and Hope & Nixon ('Floorstogo' website)
Hamsard (who were breaching competition law in relation to the supply of prescription medicines to care homes throughout England.)

There's an excellent set of resources available at http://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/index/professionals/education/education_resources.htm

What's the cost of regulation?

There are those who oppose government regulation. They claim that such "interference" is costly - and against everyone's interests - except the bureaucrats who are paid to, and gain power from, enforcement. But is this claim justified?

Consumer Protection and "Health and Safety" rules come under constant attack. Yet they are designed to protect. Isn't that one of the main reasons for having Government - to protect members of society from wrongdoing? Heaven forbid that we return to the days when life was cheap and thousands were maimed or killed because of unsafe working conditions. (My great grandfather was one who was killed in an accident in the mines). There are plenty of unscrupulous people out there - and failure to regulate the activities of bankers has cost us all dearly in recent months.

In a recent edition of TS (Trading Standards) Today - the following argument was made

Opinion: People who believe consumer protection regulation is costing British business millions of pounds a year are mistaken, argues Tony Allen.

Read the article here.

What do you think?