Page 77 - ITU-T Focus Group Digital Financial Services – Recommendations
P. 77

ITU-T Focus Group Digital Financial Services
                                                      Recommendations







                Title of recommendation       Liability of DFS providers for acts/omissions of agents
                Working Group                 Consumer Experience and Protection

                Theme                         Agents
                Audience for recommendation   Regulators





                Regulation should specify explicitly that DFS providers are liable for the acts and omissions of their agents,
                employees, and third party service providers (e.g., agent network managers, master agents, super agents, or
                other distributors).

               Regulation should stipulate that providers have clear guidelines for what is expected of agents and have
               adequate monitoring systems to ensure agent compliance with policies. AFI  states that DFS providers should
                                                                              12
               ensure that appropriate standards are in place to select, manage, and train their agents. G20 High-Level
               Principles  on Financial Consumer Protection  also state that financial service providers should be responsible
                       13
               and accountable for the actions of their authorized agents. While regulation should permit DFS providers to
               enter into agreements with other entities (e.g., agent network managers, master agents, super agents, etc.)
               to support their agent networks, the DFS provider itself maintains responsibility for: the actions of agents
               and other outsourced service providers in delivering DFS; consumer outcomes related to DFS delivery; and
               ensuring compliance of agents and the agent network with regulatory requirements and DFS provider policies
                                                                              18
               and procedures.  The GSMA Code of Conduct for Mobile Money Providers  also states that mobile money
               providers “shall assume responsibility for actions taken on their behalf by their agents (and any sub-agents)
               under the provider-agent contract.”
               Bangladesh, Brazil, Colombia, DRC, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, Rwanda, South Africa,
               Tanzania, Uganda, and Zambia all have language that explicitly states that providers are either responsible or
               liable for agent actions. Ghana, Kenya, Rwanda, and Tanzania also include more extensive language specifying
               that providers are even responsible for actions that the provider may have specified as off limits in a contract.
               For instance, Bank of Ghana’s Agent Guidelines  read: “A standard agency agreement shall, at a minimum
                                                       26
               specify that the principal is wholly responsible and liable for all actions or omissions of agents providing services
               on its behalf, even If said actions have not been authorized in the contract, as long as they relate to agency
               business or matters connected therewith”.  More commonly, regulations assign liability to both providers and
               agents. For example, in South Africa  regulations state, “If an employee or agent of a person is liable in terms
                                             27
               of this Act …, the employer or principal is jointly and severally liable with that person”.
               DFS providers should conduct regular or periodic checks on agents and conduct corrective actions as needed.
               Regulations in Bangladesh, Ghana, India, Kenya, Lesotho, Malaysia, Nigeria, and Tanzania indicate that
               regular or periodic checks on agents to ensure compliance with legal/regulatory requirements must occur. In
               Bangladesh , for example, “The banks must formulate internal audit policy to monitor and control agents. They
                         14
               should visit the agent’s outlets at a regular interval to ensure that the agents are working in accordance with
               the terms and conditions of the agreement and following the rules, regulations and guidelines issued by the
               regulators.” However, beyond saying that they should be regular or periodic, none of the regulations specify
               how often these checks should take place.  Brazil, Colombia, Indonesia, Pakistan, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, South
               Africa, and Uganda mandate that monitoring should take place, but regulations do not specifically require
               regular checks.  For instance, the Bank of Uganda  states: “In its dealings with mobile money agents, a mobile
                                                        28



               26   Bank of Ghana, Agent Guidelines https:// www. bog. gov. gh/ privatecontent/ Banking/ AGENT%20 GUIDELINES%20 UPDATED3. pdf
               27   Republic of South Africa, Consumer Protection Act (2008) http:// www. wipo. int/ edocs/ lexdocs/ laws/ en/ za/ za054en. pdf
               28   Bank of Uganda, Mobile Money Guidelines (2013) https:// www. bou. or. ug/ opencms/ bou/ bou- downloads/ Financial_ Inclusion/
                  Mobile- Money- Guidelines- 2013. pdf



                                                                                                       71
   72   73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82