§ 24. The complaints board must report breaches of the Debt Collection Act to the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway

§ 24 is short, but it has an important oversight function. It says that the complaints boards must send statements on breaches of the Debt Collection Act to the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway.

The Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway is the supervisory authority for debt collection business (inkassovirksomhet) carried on under a debt collection licence (inkassobevilling). Supervision (tilsyn) means oversight. The Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway monitors whether debt collection companies operate lawfully, responsibly and in line with the applicable requirements.

When a complaints board handles a complaint, it looks at a specific case. It may be a debtor (skyldner) who believes the debt collector (inkassator) has charged unlawful costs, sent the wrong notice, applied too much pressure or continued the collection (inndriving) after a clear objection (innsigelse).

If the complaints board concludes that the Debt Collection Act has been breached, the statement must be sent to the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway. This means the case does not only matter between you and the debt collection agency (inkassobyrå). It can also become part of the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway's overview of how the debt collection company behaves.

This matters because one breach may be a one-off. But several breaches can reveal a pattern. If the same debt collection company keeps getting statements against it, the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway can see that closer follow-up is needed.

For you as a debtor, § 24 means that a complaint to the complaints board can matter more than just your own case. If the complaints board finds a breach, the information is passed on to the authority that supervises the industry.

Why must breaches be sent to the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway?

Because the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway needs information to carry out supervision. The authority cannot see every debt collection letter, every phone call and every demand for payment (betalingsoppfordring) in Norway. It depends on reports, complaints, inspections and other information.

The complaints board holds important information. It handles specific disputes. It sees how the rules are applied in practice. If the complaints board finds that the Debt Collection Act has been breached, that is useful for the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway to know.

This makes the system more coherent. The complaints board helps resolve individual cases. The Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway can follow up the industry. § 24 links these two levels together.

Without such a reporting duty, the same type of error could repeat itself for a long time. One debtor won their case. Another debtor won their case. But the supervisory authority might never learn that the debt collection company had a systemic problem. § 24 reduces that risk.

What kinds of breaches may be relevant?

There can be many types of breaches of the Debt Collection Act. Some concern notices. For example, a debt collection notice (inkassovarsel) was not sent, or the deadline was too short.

Others concern the demand for payment. Perhaps it lacked information about the principal claim (hovedkrav), interest, costs or the right to complaints board review (nemndsbehandling). Perhaps the claim was not assessed thoroughly enough before the demand for payment was sent.

Some breaches concern good debt collection practice (god inkassoskikk). This may involve unreasonable pressure, threatening wording, too many contacts or a failure to respect that the claim is disputed (bestridt).

Other breaches may concern costs. Perhaps the debtor was charged a debt collection fee (inkassosalær) even though payment was made within the deadline. Perhaps the debt collector charged costs even though the debtor had a reasonable objection.

The point of § 24 is not to list every breach. The point is that when the complaints board states that the Debt Collection Act has been breached, this must be passed on to the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway.

Does reporting mean the debt collection agency is automatically punished?

No, not automatically. § 24 says the statement must be forwarded. It does not say that the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway must impose a sanction in each individual case.

The Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway decides for itself what the information means. Some cases may be isolated. Others may be part of a bigger picture. If many cases point in the same direction, it may become more serious.

Under other rules, the supervisory authority can issue orders (pålegg), follow up practices or, in serious cases, take action against the licence (bevilling). § 24 is an information rule. It ensures that the supervisory authority learns of the complaints board's statements on breaches of the law.

For you as the complainant, this means you do not need to forward the complaints board's statement yourself for the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway to receive it. The complaints board has that duty.

What is the difference between the complaints board and the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway?

The complaints board handles your dispute. It looks at the case between you and the debt collection company. It can give a statement on what is correct in that specific case.

The Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway supervises debt collection business. It looks at whether debt collection companies operate in line with the law. It can follow up companies, practices and licences.

You can think of it like this: The complaints board looks at your case. The Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway looks at the industry and the company. § 24 ensures that important information from individual cases can be used in supervision.

If you believe the Debt Collection Act has been breached, you should describe the breach specifically in your complaint. Do not just write that the debt collection agency is “unreasonable”. Write what they did.

Examples: “They charged a debt collection fee even though I paid within the deadline.” “They continued the collection after I disputed the claim and sent documentation.” “The demand for payment did not include an overview of interest and costs.”

Attach documentation. Debt collection letters, payment receipts, emails, text messages and screenshots can be important.

If the complaints board agrees with you that the law has been breached, the complaints board must forward the statement to the Financial Supervisory Authority of Norway. You should still keep the statement yourself.