Orfin points out that the rate of 250 euros from the Financial Client Authority generates "a perverse incentive"

MADRID, 15 Mar.

Orfin points out that the rate of 250 euros from the Financial Client Authority generates "a perverse incentive"


The economists from the Observatory of Financial Reality (Orfin), José Carlos Díez and Daniel Lacalle, have agreed that the rate of 250 euros proposed by the bill of the Authority for the Defense of Financial Clients, currently in parliamentary proceedings, generates a "perverse incentive", as reported during the presentation today of a report that assesses the creation of this new authority.

In the words of Lacalle, the rate of 250 euros per accepted claim is also an "arbitrary tax that seeks to create more claims regardless of their merit and, with this, put the financial sector in constant controversy.

In turn, the director of Orfin, José Carlos Díez, has stressed that "a public body cannot be set up with a private financing model, linked to the rate of 250 euros, because it generates a perverse incentive and there will be many more claims" . The report also indicates that the Bank of Spain "has warned of the possible increase in conflict."

The experts from the observatory have defended that the current claims system is "efficient", following the figures from the Bank of Spain, the National Securities Market Commission (CNMV) and the General Directorate of Insurance and Pension Funds.

On the one hand, Lacalle has recognized that the percentage of rectifications assumed by the entities regarding the claims before the Bank of Spain -73% in 2021 compared to 69.4% in 2020- "consolidates the improvement of this ratio, which has been constant since 2012". For his part, José Carlos Díez warned that "it is important that the changes improve the current situation and not create new problems".

Likewise, Lacalle has indicated that, of the total claims presented to the banks, "only 10% reach the claims services of the supervisors, while 90% are resolved in the same bank." For this reason, with the system proposed for the authority, he considers that "this ratio would be significantly reversed", which translates into "the breakdown of trust between the client and the entity".

On the other hand, the economists consulted for the report have agreed that doubts, criticisms or questions regarding certain aspects of this authority "should be corrected and remedied", such as the binding nature of the resolutions, which, according to Lacalle in the presentation of the report, it can lead to "a supplanting of functions that are already in the judicial environment" and, therefore, "there is a risk of unconstitutionality".

Finally, regarding the comparison with the situation in other European countries, Orfin's text highlights the heterogeneity of these bodies, as pointed out at the end of February by the president of the CNMV, Rodrigo Buenaventura, in his appearance in the Congress of Deputies to rule on the creation of the new body, since Directive 2013/11/EU "should not oblige Member States to create a specific alternative resolution entity in each retail sector". In this regard, Daniel Lacalle has assured in the presentation of the report that "there is no similar example in any country, no matter how much you want to compare the situation with the United Kingdom".

Orfin's report concludes that the doubts raised regarding the configuration of the Financial Client Defense Authority demand that the parliamentary process address these issues as soon as possible and offer the solutions, the certainty and the trust that should preside over the object and objectives of this norm. In fact, Díez concluded the event by noting that "if there is any progress to be made in Congress, they should remove the 250-euro fee."