September 24, Bucharest. This September marks 10 years since the establishment of CSALB (the Alternative Banking Dispute Resolution Centre), created through Government Ordinance 38/2015. The consumer–bank negotiations intermediated by CSALB conciliators and resolved amicably (outside of court) have significantly contributed to restoring trust in the banking system, according to representatives of the National Bank of Romania and the Romanian Banking Association.

• Over the 10 years since the founding of the Alternative Banking Dispute Resolution Centre (CSALB), the number of lawsuits between consumers and banks has dropped from more than 40,000 to around 12,000.
• Although in the early days both banks and their clients were skeptical about the effectiveness of conciliation, in 10 years, consumers of financial products and services submitted more than 20,300 requests for negotiations with banks and NBFIs.
• More than 90% of requests focused on renegotiating contractual terms: reducing interest rates, decreasing or eliminating fees, partial debt write-offs, payment deferrals, switching from ROBOR to IRCC, lowering installments for people affected directly or indirectly by COVID, reinstating repayment schedules (for those under foreclosure), refinancing loans and moving to fixed interest, dropping lawsuits, addressing banking fraud, etc.
• Since March 2016, over 4,800 Romanians have negotiated and reached agreements with credit institutions, while another 2,600 consumers settled directly with banks and NBFIs in simpler cases after submitting a request through CSALB. This year, 97% of negotiations ended in amicable settlements.
• The total benefits from these negotiations exceed €15.5 million. On average, for each case in which the parties negotiated and accepted the conciliator’s solution, the benefits amounted to about €3,700. Another important advantage of alternative dispute resolution over traditional courts is the time saved: on average, a case was resolved in just 35 days (calculated across all years of activity), from the moment the request was accepted by the bank until the conciliator’s solution was approved. In 2024, the average time dropped to only 15 days.

The economic and social impact of conciliation, as well as the future of consumer–bank relations, were among the topics discussed in CSALB’s podcast, featuring Alexandru Păunescu, representative of the National Bank of Romania on CSALB’s Coordination Board, and Florin Dănescu, Executive President of the Romanian Banking Association, in a conversation moderated by Anamaria Greu, CEO of iFink! Finance.

| PODCAST CSALB | https://youtu.be/sxhgMoTNfZY

The 5th season of CSALB Podcasts addresses topics inspired by the types of negotiation requests consumers send to the Alternative Banking Dispute Resolution Center: cards and payments, bank loans, fraud, foreclosures, court vs. alternative resolution, savings, and investments. This year, CSALB’s meetings bring together banking system specialists, credit brokers, bailiffs, anti-fraud and AI experts, etc. The debates are moderated by financial analysts, financial education lecturers, and reputable journalists from the economic press. The aim is to provide consumers with the necessary tools to manage and protect their personal finances in an unpredictable macroeconomic context.

„Born at a time of high tension between consumers and banks, this Centre has contributed not only to strengthening trust between the two sides but also to boosting financial intermediation, as people became more comfortable accessing loans, knowing there was a place where they could reach an understanding with their bank if, for objective reasons, they faced difficulties in repaying. Thousands of successful negotiations show that consumers and banks have reconciled after submitting requests to CSALB. Still, many people ask: why are banks interested in reaching amicable settlements with consumers? When banks reduce interest rates, eliminate fees, or partially or fully write off debt, they theoretically lose money. So, what motivates them to negotiate with their own clients?”

„Initially, consumers saw CSALB as an entity that would deepen conflicts with banks or even sanction them for the grievances felt in society. In September 2015, the effects of the 2008–2009 financial crisis were still being felt. There were over 40,000 lawsuits, an influx of legislative proposals affecting the banking system, plus the Swiss franc crisis at the end of 2015.
CSALB did not aim to solve all these crises, but its establishment was timely—triggering a paradigm shift toward negotiation instead of courtroom ‘battles.’ It was set up during the final transposition period of a European directive into Romanian law, becoming a unique European project within the country’s institutional framework. Although the directive did not mandate free consumer services but recommended ‘modest fees,’ Romanian banks agreed to cover the entire cost of alternative financial dispute resolution. It took 2–3 years before consumers gained trust in the entity and banks accepted negotiations.”

Before the 2008–2009 financial crisis, it was not considered that serious consumer lending problems could affect financial stability. Afterward, consumer protection regulations increased because it became clear that financial stability had also been undermined by consumer lending crises. Moreover, trust itself in the financial system can impact stability. Today, banks cannot afford to lose consumers—not only because of a lost client, but because of the lost trust, which spreads rapidly. Negotiation offers consumers the chance to honor their contracts. Even if a bank earns less than expected, having a satisfied consumer is more valuable. Thus, both sides benefit: consumers gain financially, while banks secure long-term business.

When a case with a consumer reaches court, the bank does not truly win, even if it is successful. Dissatisfaction spreads, because what we witness is a disproportionate struggle between a consumer and a financial institution, and any eventual success in court cannot be used by banks in public communication for obvious reasons. The “win-win” option offered by conciliation is by far preferable, as it relies on negotiation and compromise as the common ground between the two disputing parties.

Some 800 cases were transferred from courts to CSALB, where the parties suspended litigation, sought amicable resolution, and returned to court announcing that the case had been settled. Discussions with banks around 2018 encouraged them to negotiate even after lawsuits had begun. The message was: “Let’s find a compromise solution at the last minute, even in foreclosure cases!

After 10 years, the situation has changed fundamentally: applicants now know exactly what they want, the confrontational attitude has faded, and banks’ willingness to negotiate has grown significantly. Internal complaints mechanisms were also adjusted, so today multiple departments are involved in negotiations directly coordinated with CSALB.”

„For banks, the difficulty at first was that they were helping create this solution – CSALB -, funding it annually, while at the same time being blamed for decisions that weren’t theirs. Across Europe, banks were scapegoated for the financial crisis, while politicians—who often failed to deliver on promises—shifted blame onto banks. For example, when salaries were cut or VAT increased, loan repayment capacity was affected by external decisions, not by banks. Yet politicians pointed at banks simply because they continued to expect clients to repay loans already spent.

It was a time when everyone felt wronged: clients accused banks for their inability to pay, while banks felt unfairly vilified by public narratives fueled by politics. For example, when public sector salaries for teachers and doctors were cut, those groups were considered the best clients in banks’ portfolios.

Looking back, we see why CSALB is such a success today: it became an effective instrument where consumers and banks sit at the table, discuss, and find amicable solutions—at no cost to the consumer. CSALB transformed past distrust into trust, making it a cultural as well as a quantitative achievement.

Our legacy from 40 years of communism was one of conflict and collectivist thinking, where people avoided individual responsibility. Many expected to stop paying loans, an exaggerated social expectation. CSALB worked case by case, person by person, and banks chose to leave behind the conflict-driven approach in favor of amicable dispute settlement. This model should also be extended to other industries. If we talk about trust, banks are arguably the most trusted institutions in Romania today, with 13 million depositors holding their savings in bank accounts.”

***

About CSALB: CSALB is an entity established following a European directive, offering free and quick mediation—under three months—between consumers and banks or non-bank financial institutions for ongoing contracts. Consumers from any Romanian county can submit requests to the Alternative Banking Dispute Resolution Center (CSALB) by filling out an online form on www.csalb.ro. If the bank agrees to enter negotiation, a conciliator is appointed. CSALB works with 16 of the top legal and financial experts in Romania. All cases are settled amicably, and the resulting agreement holds the legal power of a court decision.