December ''Member State experience – follow up to the notifications - actions undertaken in relation to the notifications'' Brussels, December 1 st, 2006 Helmuth Perz Federal Ministry of Social Security, Generations and Consumer Protection Vienna, Austria

2 Legal basis Product Safety Act 1994 (impl. 92/59/EEC) – Vague obligation – No formal requirements – Virtually no notifications Product Safety Act 2004 (impl. 2001/95/EC) – § 7 (4) Where marketers know or should know from information available to them within the scope of their business activities that a product marketed by them poses a danger to consumers that is incompatible with the general safety requirement pursuant to Section 4 (1), they shall immediately notify a competent authority thereof. This shall apply in any case to provisions – in particular recalls - taken by marketers to avert any dangers to consumers.

3 Number of notifications Approx. 25 notifications/year – Most of these are subject to a RAPEX-notification by another memberstate. – Motor vehicles: about 100 per year.

4 Typical procedure Telephone call by a law firm. – Generic overview of the case. Brand/company not mentioned at this stage. – Request for advice: How to carry out the recall? Whom to notify? Contents of notification? Date of publication? Penalties? Rate of return? Follow up? RAPEX notification?

5 Response 1 „Confidence building response“ – Presenting our authority as partner. – Offer for assistance (e.g. media contacts). – Help with risk assessment. – No insistence on recalling companies name/brand (at this stage). – Advice to search our website for relevant documents (e.g. Product Safety Act, corrective action guide, RAPEX guidelines).

6 Response 2 – Providing contact details (Ministry of Consumer Protection being main contact). – No formal requirements for notifications. – but: notifcation has to contain all necessary information to identify the product/producer…compare RAPEX data set) – No specific rate of return. For authorities 100 % is the only acceptable rate of return although in practice not achievable. Responsibility rests mainly with the recalling company. – Date of publication in accordance with the company. – Penalties are not applicable for voluntary recalls. – Follow up information (effectiveness) requested.

7 Response 3 – Decision on RAPEX notification according to GPSD/RAPEX guidelines. – General advice: Advice on product liability. Contacts to other experts (other authorities). …

8 Silent recall – Sometimes accepted Depending on risk! E.g. replacement program takes time! Conditions: – Customers are known to company and are informed directly. – International recall of products guaranteed! Should result in high rate of return! Confidential RAPEX notification applicable!

9 Additional Q & A – Reputation of the company: Not endangered with reliable recall. Examples of best practice! – Costs of the recall: Recall not effective if not free of cost for consumers (no legal provision!). – Advertisments: Necessary, but second best solution. Media reports preferable. TV- news. Notice in the shops? Notice on website!!!!! – Consumer associations: Should be notified as well.

10 Follow up by authorities – Depending on risk! – Depending on companies behaviour in the past. – Checks of media/advertising. – Checks of companies website. – On-site checks if applicable. – Immediate checks if there are complaints! – Additional compulsory measures normally not needed!

11 Problems 1: – In general: Most companies are not prepared for recalls! – Recalls are standard – every company may (and will) face a recall at someday! No confidence in authorities! Fear of RAPEX notification! No dedicated staff for recall procedures and product safety! No dedicated contact for authorities! No use of website. – Legal measures envisaged! – Small companies No legal department – lack of knowledge.

12 Problems 2: – No accurate information: Missing details. Risk assessment procedure not comprehensible. Envisaged measures not explained. No photographs. … – Rapex Guidelines notification form. – > Business application (not for small companies!).

13 Problems 3: – Time lag / international recalls If only one authority in one member state is notified (o.k. if RAPEX-notification is guaranteed) – Authorities get aware of recall before RAPEX-notification is disseminated Company has to be addressed > confusion! > Business application enables „real time notification“!

14 Best practice – Recall of motor vehicles in Austria: Legal provisions in Transportation Act (KFG Art 40 (b)9) Companies apply for recall procedure at the VVO/Association of Austrian Insurance Companies (which is running the central car register) – Companies provide identification numbers of motor vehicles. VVO matches data and sends letters (together with official note of the authority) to car owners. – Addresses are not given to companies. Procedure may be repeated. – > Cheap & effective!

15 Thank you for your attention! Helmuth Perz Federal Ministry of Social Security, Generations and Consumer Protection, Unit III/2 - Product Safety Radetzkystrasse 2 A 1031 Vienna, Austria Phone: Fax: Internet: