金融消費評議制度之分析與檢討

A Study of Financial Ombudsman

戴佑如(Yu-Ju Tai)

指導教授 ： 汪信君

國立臺灣大學/法律學院/法律學研究所/碩士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2014.02070

摘要

由於金融市場國際化及金融商品複雜性等因素，加上近年經濟上的波動及金融危機之發生，造成金融消費爭議案件大幅增加，而凸顯出金融監管及金融消費者保護之重要。各國為改善此問題，紛紛提出各種金融改革法案。為處理金融消費爭議，我國「財團法人金融消費評議中心」於2012年1月2日正式營運，其立法目的為「公平合理、迅速有效處理金融消費爭議，以保護金融消費者權益」。然為求爭議處理機構之長期發展，現行金融消費者保護法下爭議處理機制之架構是否足夠？即是本文欲研究、探討之問題。

本文比較英國、新加坡及澳洲之爭議處理機制，以「階段劃分」之方式，藉由建立各階段之判斷準則，以該判斷準則為比較基準，衡量各國制度與此判斷標準之差別，即除說明各國制度之外，並對各國制度之不同點進行比較，分析該差異性對我國制度之影響與未來改善方向。

本文最後認為我國金融消費評議中心在各方面均相當完善，謹提出相關建議如下以供未來參考：

就組織方面，我國應「增設爭議處理機構人員之免責條款」，以保障其獨立性；考量「易近性與費用合理性之平衡」，在金融消費者利用爭議處理機構解決金融紛爭之意願及爭議處理機構之日常運作維持方面，達成平衡，例如就年費改採彈性預估之方式。就程序審查方面，應「增設評議程序前之處理方式」，以減輕評議委員案件量之負擔，而能維持良好之評議品質；「增設當事人拒絕或遲延提出資訊之法律效果」，擴大爭議處理機構之資訊調閱權，以達成平衡雙方資訊與保護金融消費者之目的。

關鍵字

金融消費者保護法 ； 爭議處理機制 ； 金融消費評議中心 ； 金融公評人 ； 金融爭議調解中心 ； 澳洲金融公評人

並列摘要

Attributing to the factors of the internationalization of the financial market, the complexity of the financial products and the occurrence of the financial crisis, the complaints regarding the financial consumption have largely increased these years, which implies the importance of the financial supervision and the consumer protection. To solve such problem, lots of countries drafted and enacted the financial reform legislations. In order to handle financial disputes, Taiwan has also established the "Financial Ombudsman Institution ("FOI")" on January 2, 2012, with legislative purpose of "To handle the financial consuming disputes fairly, reasonably and efficiently so as to protect financial consumers". However, the question of "whether the structure of the disputes settlement under the present Financial Consumer Protection Act is sufficient?" is what this thesis seeks to answer.

This thesis ("Thesis") compares the system of disputes settlement of United Kingdom, Singapore and Australia (collectively, "Analyzed Countries") through dividing the system into 3 steps. By establishing the standards of each step and taking such standards as the comparison basis, the Thesis may evaluate the differences between standards and the systems of the Analyzed Countries. The thesis not only explains each system of the Analyzed Countries, but also analyzes the effect of the differences so as to understand the directions to improve our system.

In conclusion, the Thesis believes our FOI works quite perfect in every respect and proposes the following suggestions for the consideration in the future.

For the organization perspective, it is suggested to "include the indemnification clause for the personnel of the FOI" to protect its independence and to take "the balance of accessibility and fee reasonableness" into consideration. To further explain the latter suggestion, it is to increase the will of consumers to use FOI as the method to settle disputes, whereas to charge consumers reasonable fees to maintain the operation of the FOI. For the process perspective, it is suggested to "establish the pre-handling process before the ombudsman committee" so as to ease the burden of the committee and maintain the good quality of their decision. In addition, it is advisable to extend the investigation power of the FOI by imposing the legal effect when the party refuses or delays to provide the required information to achieve the goals of information balance and consumer protection.

並列關鍵字

Financial Consumer Protection Act ； system for disputes settlement ； Financial Ombudsman Institution ； Financial Ombudsman Service ； Financial Industry Disputes Resolution Centre Ltd ； FOS ； FIDReC

參考文獻

7.鄭惠敏(2011)，《從英國制度檢視我國金融消費爭議處理制度》，國立臺灣大學法律學院科際整合法律學研究所碩士論文。

3.張新媚(2010)，《金融交易之資訊義務─以金融機構之民事責任為中心》，國立臺灣大學法律學院法律學研究所碩士論文。

6.林育廷(2009)，〈論金融專業人員之信賴義務〉，《東吳法律學報》，第20卷第4期，頁213-249。

4.楊麗萍(2011)，《金融消費爭議處理機制之法制研究》，國立政治大學法學院碩士在職專班碩士論文。

5.蔡佳真(2007)，《英國金融服務公評人制度之研究─兼比較我國金融申訴制度》，國立政治大學風險管理與保險研究所碩士論文。