Complaints reporting compared across eight EU markets
Complaints is the area where the EU floor is thinnest and national practice differs most. PSD2 sets one reply clock for payment-services complaints. Everything around it — the clock for other complaints, when the customer can escalate, which out-of-court body hears the case and whether its decision binds you — is national. This page compares eight markets for a payment or e-money institution, with the clocks taken from the national texts and the bodies’ own guidance.
1. The EU floor: Article 101 PSD2
Article 101 of Directive (EU) 2015/2366 requires payment service providers to answer complaints about the rights and obligations in Titles III and IV of the Directive, on paper or another durable medium, within 15 business days of receipt. In exceptional situations outside the provider’s control it may send a holding reply explaining the delay and giving a date for the final answer. The Directive caps that at 35 business days, and Member States may keep or adopt rules that are more favourable to the user.
Most of the eight markets copy the floor. France’s article L. 133-45 of the Code monétaire et financier, Germany’s and Luxembourg’s transpositions, and the Arbitro Bancario Finanziario’s guidance for Italy all use 15 business days. Spain uses the option to go shorter: article 69 of Real Decreto-ley 19/2018 keeps 15 business days but caps the final answer at one month rather than 35 business days.
Complaints outside Titles III and IV — fees under the framework contract, account closures, onboarding refusals, data — are not covered by Article 101. For those, each market applies its own period, and that period usually also decides when the customer may go to the out-of-court body.
2. The comparison
| Market | Out-of-court body | When the customer can escalate | Body’s timing | Binding? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Spain | Banco de España claims service (Orden ECC/2502/2012) | After two months without resolution by the firm’s customer service (art. 10.2.a) | Firm’s allegations within 15 business days (art. 11); final report within four months (art. 12) | No |
| France | The médiateur of the firm or its sector | After a prior written complaint to the firm; in practice two months for consumer complaints | Set by the mediation scheme | No |
| Italy | Arbitro Bancario Finanziario (ABF) | After the firm’s 60 days (15 business days for payment services); within 12 months of the complaint | Claims up to €200,000; non-compliance is published | No, but published |
| Netherlands | Kifid | After the firm’s internal procedure, or after eight weeks without an answer | Free for consumers at first instance; appeal costs the consumer €500 | Yes, where the firm has accepted binding decisions |
| Germany | BaFin’s Schlichtungsstelle | After a prior complaint to the firm, with no court case pending | Proposal after the firm’s statement | No |
| Luxembourg | CSSF out-of-court procedure (CSSF Regulation 16-07) | After one month without a satisfactory answer, and within one year of the complaint | Reasoned conclusion in about 90 days once the file is complete | No |
| Belgium | Ombudsfin | Since 3 January 2026 a prior complaint to the firm is no longer a statutory precondition (art. 128/5) | 90 calendar days, extendable once | No |
| Ireland | Financial Services and Pensions Ombudsman (FSPO) | After the firm’s procedure: acknowledgement in 5 business days, resolution target of 40 business days | Formal investigation and legally binding decision | Yes — up to €500,000 |
Two columns decide the cost of a complaint. The escalation trigger tells you how long your internal process may run before you lose control of the case. The binding column tells you what the outside body can impose. Ireland and, for most authorised firms, the Netherlands are the markets where a decision can force payment or rectification. Italy’s ABF is non-binding, but non-compliance is made public, which is often worse.
3. Why one SLA does not work
A single internal service level fails in two directions. Set it at 30 days and every payment complaint breaches Article 101 at day 15 unless a holding reply goes out. Set it at 15 business days for everything and you over-serve general complaints while leaving no room for the cases that need investigation. The workable design classifies at intake on two questions — is this a payment-services complaint under Titles III and IV, and which market’s customer is it — and sets the clock from the answer.
The internal clock is also the escalation gate. In Luxembourg, the customer may go to the CSSF once one month has passed without a satisfactory answer. In the Netherlands, Kifid can take the case after eight weeks without an answer. In Spain, the Banco de España admits claims once two months have passed. Missing your own deadline does not just breach a rule — it opens the case to an outside body before you have finished investigating.
4. Handling, reporting and publishing are three different duties
Firms often merge three obligations that national rules keep separate:
- Handling — a substantive reply within the applicable clock, in writing, naming the out-of-court body the customer may use.
- Internal and supervisory reporting — in Spain, for example, article 17 of Orden ECO/734/2004 requires the customer-service department to report to the board within the first quarter of each year, with statistics on complaints, admissions, reasons, amounts and outcomes, and a summary goes into the annual report. Supervisors in the other markets collect complaints data on their own cycles.
- Answering the out-of-court body — a separate clock that starts when the body contacts you. The Banco de España gives the firm 15 business days to submit its allegations; Ombudsfin’s 90 days run from its side, not yours.
The third is the one most often missed. An allegations request is a deadline, not a courtesy. It also arrives at a different address from customer complaints, so it needs its own owner.
5. One dataset for eight regimes
The national category sets do not match, so build a detailed internal taxonomy and map it out to each market. Capture five attributes at intake:
- Market — the customer’s country, which decides the body and the general clock.
- PSD2 scope — inside Titles III and IV or not, which decides whether the 15-business-day clock applies.
- Customer type — consumer, micro-enterprise or other. In Ireland, a business with turnover of €3 million or less can bring a case to the FSPO.
- Cause — on your own taxonomy, detailed enough to map to every national category set.
- Dates and outcome — received, holding reply, final reply, escalation, the body’s decision and any payment.
With those fields, each national return or board report is a filter and a sum, not a reclassification exercise.
6. Worked scenarios
Scenario one — a disputed card payment from a Spanish customer. An e-money institution passported into Spain receives a complaint about an unauthorised card payment. Its group workflow allows 35 business days with a holding reply. Rule: article 69 RDL 19/2018 — 15 business days, with the final answer no later than one month. What the complaints lead does: sets the Spanish payment-complaint clock to the one-month cap. A holding reply goes out on day 12, and the final answer is due before the month ends. Outcome: the group workflow is compliant everywhere because it now runs to the shortest cap.
Scenario two — an account closure for a Luxembourg customer. A customer complains that their account was closed with notice and asks for reasons. The complaint is outside Titles III and IV. Rule: CSSF Regulation 16-07 — the customer may escalate to the CSSF if there is no satisfactory answer within one month. What the team does: puts the case on the one-month track and sends a reasoned reply in week three, naming the CSSF procedure. Outcome: the customer can still escalate, but the file now contains a timely, reasoned answer, which is what the CSSF will look for.
Scenario three — an Irish company’s account exit. A payment institution exits an Irish limited company with two weeks’ notice. The company’s turnover is €1.6 million. Rule: the FSPO can hear businesses with turnover of €3 million or less, and its decisions bind. It can direct compensation up to €500,000 and rectification without a cap. What compliance does: handles the dispute as a regulated complaint and not as a commercial negotiation: it acknowledges within 5 business days and documents the exit reasons. Outcome: if the case reaches the FSPO, the firm arrives with a full record. Without it, the exposure includes a binding order to restore the relationship.
Scenario four — an Italian claim at day 50. An Italian customer complains about a fee. The firm’s internal queue is running at 50 days. Rule: the ABF guidance gives the intermediary 60 days for general complaints. What the team does: moves the case forward and replies by day 60, naming the ABF route. Outcome: the deadline is met. The customer keeps 12 months to file with the ABF, and the firm now has time to prepare its defence.
7. FAQ
Is there one EU deadline for complaints?
Only for payment-services complaints under Titles III and IV of PSD2: 15 business days, up to 35 in exceptional cases. Spain caps the final answer at one month. Other complaints follow national periods.
Which out-of-court decisions are binding?
The FSPO in Ireland (up to €500,000), and Kifid in the Netherlands where the firm has accepted binding decisions. The Banco de España, the CSSF, Ombudsfin, the German Schlichtungsstelle, French mediators and the ABF are non-binding — though the ABF publishes non-compliance.
When can a customer escalate?
It depends on the market: one month in Luxembourg, eight weeks in the Netherlands, two months in Spain, 60 days for general complaints in Italy. In Belgium a prior complaint to the firm has not been a statutory precondition since 3 January 2026.
Does a passported firm follow host-state rules?
For complaints from host-state customers, the host-state conduct rules and out-of-court body generally apply alongside any home-state reporting. Check each leg below.
How should we store complaints data?
On a detailed internal taxonomy with market, PSD2 scope, customer type, cause and dates captured at intake, then mapped to each national category set.
8. What to do, today
- Add a PSD2-scope flag to intake and run payment complaints to the shortest cap — one month for Spain.
- Set the general clock per market from the table above, with a checkpoint before each escalation gate.
- Template final-response letters per market, naming the correct out-of-court body.
- Give requests from out-of-court bodies their own owner and deadline tracker.
- Record turnover for business customers in Ireland so that FSPO-eligible disputes are visible.
Related: Spain (DCMR) · France (ACPR) · Italy (ABF) · Netherlands (Kifid) · Germany (BaFin) · Luxembourg (CSSF) · Belgium (Ombudsfin) · Ireland (FSPO)
