EBA欧洲银行-BSG-Response-to-EBA-CP-on-Draft-Guidelines-on-the-conditions-to-be-met-to-benefit-from-an-exemption-from-contingency-measures-28EBA-CP-2018-0929_13-August-2018-_6页_214kb

EBA Banking Stakeholder Group Consultation Summary

Core Content

The EBA Banking Stakeholder Group (BSG) has provided detailed feedback on the consultation paper EBA/CP/2018/09, which outlines draft guidelines on the conditions to be met to benefit from an exemption from contingency measures under Article 33(6) of Regulation (EU) 2018/389 (RTS on SCA & CSC). The BSG has generally supported the EBA's assessments but has raised several concerns and suggestions regarding the implementation and interpretation of the guidelines.

Main Views and Key Points

Question 1: KPIs and Uptime/Downtime Calculation

• Agreement: The BSG agrees with the EBA's assessments on KPIs, uptime, and downtime.
• Concern: They are worried that publishing commercially sensitive KPIs on ASPSP websites could lead to confusion and inappropriate comparisons.
• Suggestions:
  • Include performance metrics for resolving issues/errors on dedicated interfaces in Guideline 2.1.
  • Add performance metrics on data scope and accuracy in Guideline 2.3(b).
  • Establish a reporting channel for TPPs to report availability and performance issues to CAs.

Question 2: Stress Testing

• Agreement: The BSG supports the EBA's approach to stress testing.
• Suggestion:
  • Stress test dedicated interfaces by comparing them with existing bank channels.
  • Expand Guideline 4.3 to require ASPSPs to provide CAs with a summary of stress testing results for all access interfaces.

Question 3: Monitoring

• Agreement: The BSG supports the EBA's assessments on monitoring.

Question 4: Obstacles

• Agreement: The BSG agrees with the EBA's assessments on obstacles.
• Opinions:
  • Support for Redirection: Some BSG members believe redirection is a secure method and should not be considered an obstacle.
  • Concern for Redirection: Others argue that restricting solutions to redirection may hinder innovation and reduce user experience.
  • Recommendation: The BSG urges the EBA to retain Guideline 5 as it stands.
  • Additional Concern: Some BSG members are worried about the continued need for consumers to share Personal Security Credentials for non-payment account access.

Question 5: Design and Testing

• Agreement: The BSG supports the EBA's assessment on design and testing.
• Suggestion: The design and testing process should involve consumer representatives and TPPs.

Question 6: 'Widely Used' Interface

• Agreement: The BSG agrees with the EBA's assessment on the 'widely used' criterion.
• Concern: The current requirement for 'widely used' is seen as too vague and lacks evidence of usage.
• Suggestion: ASPSPs should demonstrate that a regulator or API standardisation initiative has assessed the testing environment over an extended period and that it has been tested with active TPP engagement.

Question 7: Service Level Targets and Statistical Data

• Agreement: The BSG supports the use of service level targets and statistical data.
• Suggestion: These should be supplemented with data from complaints by PSPs, TPPs, and consumers.
• Recommendation: Include volume-based information and resolution timelines for errors of different severity in Guideline 8.1(b).

Question 8: Guideline 9

• Agreement: The BSG supports the proposed Guideline 9.

Question 9: Timelines for Exemption Requirements

• Concern: The timelines for ASPSPs to meet the requirements before the September 2019 deadline are seen as too tight.
• Impact: This may lead to rushed implementation and a lack of quality in the exemption assessment process.
• Recommendation: The EBA should publish the final version of the guidelines as soon as possible and work with CAs to ensure consistency and quality during the transitional period.

Question 10: Level of Detail in Guidelines

• Concern: The lack of clarity in the guidelines has caused uncertainty among ASPSPs regarding the exemption.
• Impact: This uncertainty may lead to the unnecessary implementation of fallback mechanisms, undermining the incentive to develop high-quality APIs.
• Recommendation: The fallback mechanism should be reconsidered to better align with consumer and regulatory interests, and the guidelines should be reviewed sooner than the standard 2-3 year cycle.

Conclusion

The BSG generally supports the EBA's consultation but emphasizes the need for clarity, harmonization, and a balanced approach in defining the conditions for exemption from contingency measures. They stress the importance of maintaining security and consumer choice while encouraging innovation and high-quality API development.