本文選題：非訴訟 + 金融消費(fèi)糾紛　； 參考：《江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：金融消費(fèi)者在維系金融良性循環(huán)發(fā)展中的角色不容漠視,因?yàn)樗麄兊膫�(gè)體數(shù)量最龐大、資金供應(yīng)總量最多、資金價(jià)格最廉價(jià)、存款貢獻(xiàn)度最大。但他們組織松散,單個(gè)消費(fèi)者的力量十分脆弱,處于明顯弱勢(shì)的一方,位于整個(gè)金融體系的最下層,合法權(quán)益最容易受到侵害。2008年爆發(fā)的全球金融危機(jī)不僅使金融消費(fèi)者利益受損嚴(yán)重,更使金融體系遭受重創(chuàng)。當(dāng)各國政府反思危機(jī)的深層原因時(shí),紛紛認(rèn)為金融消費(fèi)者權(quán)益被漠視被濫用是重要誘因,并將強(qiáng)化金融消費(fèi)者保護(hù)作為危機(jī)后金融體制改革的三大重點(diǎn)之一。近年來,國內(nèi)外眾多專家學(xué)者將金融消費(fèi)者保護(hù)作為重點(diǎn)研究方向之一,研究成果也與日俱增。這些成果主要集中在金融消費(fèi)者的定義界限、受損表現(xiàn)、基本權(quán)利、保護(hù)原則、金融教育、信息披露、合同規(guī)制、監(jiān)管改革、糾紛解決等方面。這些研究成果構(gòu)成了有關(guān)該理論與實(shí)踐的完整體系。與此同時(shí),這些文獻(xiàn)也構(gòu)成了本文研究的起點(diǎn)。本文將研究重點(diǎn)聚焦在非訴訟金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制的構(gòu)建上。在此之前,并不缺乏這方面的文獻(xiàn),這些資料主要從微觀層面分析法院訴訟、金融仲裁、三方和解、申訴專員的適用范圍、優(yōu)勢(shì)與劣勢(shì)。本文的新穎之處在于將“統(tǒng)合”思維納入糾紛解決機(jī)制之中,把種類繁多、相對(duì)獨(dú)立的解決手段“統(tǒng)合”起來,從宏觀層面把握該機(jī)制的世界發(fā)展趨勢(shì),從中觀層面把握各類機(jī)制的共性與個(gè)性,從微觀層面剖析“統(tǒng)合”思維在該機(jī)制中的運(yùn)用。本文框架結(jié)構(gòu)分七部分。其中,第一部分是導(dǎo)論,先是簡(jiǎn)練地介紹了我國消費(fèi)者所處的金融環(huán)境,提煉了存在的主要問題,指出我國解決手段較為單一,因此訴訟成為最重要的解決手段,但法院的糾紛解決能力與精力日益受到考驗(yàn),亟須建立新型解決方式,并在此基礎(chǔ)上總結(jié)了國外盛行與受歡迎的金融消費(fèi)糾紛處理方法；其次,綜述國內(nèi)外有關(guān)方面的研究文獻(xiàn),摸清了其研究脈絡(luò),指出其研究空缺；再次,提出本文的研究方向與思路；最后,介紹了研究方法。第二部分是理論分析。首先,簡(jiǎn)要地分析了金融消費(fèi)糾紛的特點(diǎn)和性質(zhì),特點(diǎn)包括雙方實(shí)力懸殊、專業(yè)性較強(qiáng)、社會(huì)影響大,性質(zhì)包括該糾紛既屬于消費(fèi)糾紛,又屬合同或侵權(quán)糾紛；其次,從經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)和行為金融學(xué)兩個(gè)視角分析其理論基礎(chǔ),前者包括信息不對(duì)稱、公共物品理論和自然壟斷理論、外部效應(yīng)理論,后者包括期望理論、處置效應(yīng)、過度自信、從眾心理、心理賬戶、認(rèn)知偏差等理論。第三部分是模型分析。這既是研究的難點(diǎn),也是本文的創(chuàng)新點(diǎn)之一�？v觀當(dāng)前可查找的所有相關(guān)研究文獻(xiàn),引入模型分析的文獻(xiàn)非常少見。這主要是由于數(shù)量模型側(cè)重于定量分析,而本文偏重于定性分析,兩者之間很難找到結(jié)合點(diǎn),更何況有關(guān)這方面的時(shí)間序列不長、不多、不完整。本文依據(jù)探索提出了一個(gè)理論模型,并以投連險(xiǎn)銷售為例予以具體分析。雖然以一個(gè)案例介紹,但不失一般性。第四部分是我國金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決現(xiàn)狀與問題分析。其中,糾紛現(xiàn)狀包括種類和數(shù)量較多、消費(fèi)者的弱勢(shì)地位明顯、金融分業(yè)監(jiān)管存在明顯缺陷、訴訟等傳統(tǒng)解決方式的效果有限；糾紛解決手段包括金融企業(yè)內(nèi)部、金融業(yè)自律機(jī)構(gòu)、信訪、證交所糾紛解決；糾紛解決存在的問題則從監(jiān)管部門、行業(yè)協(xié)會(huì)、金融服務(wù)部門等視角剖析；之后,以“烏龍指”事件作為典型案例來具體分析。第五部分介紹非訴訟金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制。首先,回顧其產(chǎn)生與發(fā)展；其次,概括其分類與特點(diǎn),著重介紹調(diào)解、仲裁和金融申訴專員(Financial Ombudsman Service,簡(jiǎn)稱FOS)的特點(diǎn)；再次,歸納其國際發(fā)展現(xiàn)狀,并用表格形式歸納該機(jī)制在英國、澳大利亞等11個(gè)國家和地區(qū)的情況,并具體從金融法律體系、建立情況、監(jiān)管主體、實(shí)施主體、經(jīng)費(fèi)等方面總結(jié)。第六部分選取代表性國家和地區(qū)非訴訟金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制的國際經(jīng)驗(yàn)進(jìn)行詳細(xì)介紹。首先,以日本為例介紹行業(yè)統(tǒng)合型解決機(jī)制,包括引入背景、立法進(jìn)程、機(jī)構(gòu)的資質(zhì)與設(shè)立、金融機(jī)構(gòu)的義務(wù)、解決流程、主要成效；其次,以中國臺(tái)灣為例介紹準(zhǔn)統(tǒng)合型解決機(jī)制,包括構(gòu)建該機(jī)制的考量因素、引入背景、立法與機(jī)構(gòu)設(shè)置、金融消費(fèi)評(píng)議中心(Financial Ombudsman Institution,簡(jiǎn)稱FOI)、獨(dú)特優(yōu)勢(shì)；再次,以英國為例介紹完全統(tǒng)合型解決機(jī)制,具體從引入背景、機(jī)制組成、獨(dú)特優(yōu)勢(shì)介紹；最后,從解決理念、立法保障、發(fā)展路徑、機(jī)構(gòu)設(shè)置、程序保障、約束力、救濟(jì)手段、費(fèi)用、效果、人才保障等方面概括上述三類機(jī)制。第七部分探討構(gòu)建我國非訴訟金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制。其一,要完善我國現(xiàn)有的金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制；其次,逐步引入國外運(yùn)作成熟的金融申訴專員制度,在引入該制度時(shí)要考慮金融消費(fèi)者的范圍、調(diào)解機(jī)制的約束力、調(diào)解機(jī)構(gòu)的設(shè)置、訴訟與調(diào)解的對(duì)接等問題；其三,闡述金融申訴專員制度在我國的實(shí)施步驟。
[Abstract]:The role of financial consumers in maintaining a virtuous circle of financial development can not be ignored, because they have the largest number of individuals, the largest supply of funds, the cheapest capital prices, and the greatest contribution to the deposit. But they are loosely organized and the power of individual consumers is very fragile, and the most vulnerable part of the financial system is at the bottom of the financial system. The global financial crisis, which is most likely to be infringed on.2008 years, is not only a serious damage to the interests of financial consumers, but also a serious damage to the financial system. When governments reflect on the deep causes of the crisis, they think that financial consumer rights are ignored and abused as an important inducement, and the financial consumer protection will be strengthened as a result. In recent years, one of the three major priorities of the financial system reform after the crisis. In recent years, many experts and scholars at home and abroad have taken financial consumer protection as one of the key research directions, and the research results are increasing. These achievements are mainly focused on the definition boundary of financial consumers, damage performance, basic rights, protection principles, financial education, information disclosure, and contracts. These research results constitute the complete system of the theory and practice. At the same time, these documents also constitute the starting point of this study. This paper focuses on the construction of the settlement mechanism of non litigation financial consumption disputes. Before this, there is no lack of literature in this area. Some information mainly from the micro level of the court litigation, Financial Arbitration, the three party reconciliation, the scope of the application of the Ombudsman, advantages and disadvantages. The novelty of this article lies in the integration of "unified" thinking into the dispute settlement mechanism, combining a wide variety of relatively independent solutions and grasping the world from the macro level. The development trend is to grasp the generality and individuality of all kinds of mechanisms from the middle level, and analyze the application of "integration" thinking in this mechanism from the micro level. The frame structure of this article is divided into seven parts. The first part is introduction, the first is a brief introduction to the financial environment of China's consumers, refining the main existing problems and pointing out the settlement of our country. The method is relatively simple, so the lawsuit becomes the most important solution, but the ability and energy of the dispute settlement of the court are increasingly tested. It is urgent to establish a new solution. On the basis of this, it summarizes the popular and popular methods of dealing with financial consumption disputes in foreign countries. Secondly, it summarizes the research literature at home and abroad and finds out. Its research vein, point out its research vacancy; again, put forward the research direction and train of thought of this article; finally, it introduces the research method. The second part is the theoretical analysis. First, it briefly analyzes the characteristics and nature of the financial consumption disputes, including the great disparity between the two sides, the strong professionalism, the great social influence, and the nature of the dispute belongs to the dispute, which belongs to the dispute both belong to both Consumption disputes belong to contract or tort disputes. Secondly, the theoretical basis is analyzed from two perspectives of economics and behavioral finance. The former includes information asymmetry, public goods theory and natural monopoly theory, external effect theory, and the latter includes theory of expectation, disposal effect, overconfidence, herd psychology, psychological account, cognitive bias and so on. The third part is model analysis. This is not only the difficulty of the research, but also one of the innovation points of this article. Looking at all the relevant research documents that can be found at present, the literature introducing model analysis is very rare. This is mainly because the quantitative model is focused on the quantitative analysis, and this article is more difficult to find the binding point between the two. The time series of this aspect is not long, not much and incomplete. This paper puts forward a theoretical model based on exploration, and gives a concrete analysis of the sale of venture capital insurance as an example. Although it is introduced in one case, it does not lose its general nature. The fourth part is the analysis of the current situation and problems of our country's financial consumption dispute settlement. Among them, the status of the dispute includes the types and the types of disputes. There are many numbers, the disadvantaged position of the consumers is obvious, the supervision of the financial division has obvious defects, the effect of the traditional solutions such as litigation is limited, and the means of dispute settlement include the internal of financial enterprises, the self-discipline institutions of the financial industry, the petition and the stock exchange, and the problems existing in the dispute settlement are from the supervision department, the trade association and the financial service department. The fifth part introduces the emergence and development of non litigation financial consumption disputes. Secondly, it summarizes its classification and characteristics, and focuses on the special introduction of mediation, arbitration and financial Deuteronomy (Financial Ombudsman Service, FOS). Thirdly, the present situation of international development is summarized, and the situation of the mechanism in 11 countries and regions in Britain and Australia is summed up in the form of form, and from the financial legal system, the establishment of the situation, the subject of supervision, the main body of the implementation, the funds and so on. The sixth part selects the representative national and regional non litigation financial consumption dispute resolution machine. The international experience of the system is introduced in detail. First of all, we take Japan as an example to introduce the industry unified solution mechanism, including the introduction of the background, the legislative process, the qualification and establishment of the institutions, the obligations of the financial institutions, the solution process and the main results. Secondly, this paper introduces the quasi unified solution mechanism in Taiwan, China, including the consideration of the factors for the construction of the mechanism. Into the background, the legislative and institutional settings, the Financial Ombudsman Institution, the unique advantage of the center. Again, the United Kingdom is introduced as an example of the complete integration type solution mechanism, specifically from the introduction of the background, the mechanism, the unique advantage introduction; finally, from the solution concept, the legislative guarantee, the development path, the institution setting, the program protection. The above three mechanisms are summarized in the aspects of barrier, binding, relief means, cost, effect and talent guarantee. The seventh part discusses the construction of our country's non litigation financial consumption dispute settlement mechanism. First, we should perfect the existing financial consumption dispute settlement mechanism in our country; secondly, introduce the mature financial ombudsman system of foreign operation, in the introduction of this system. The system should consider the scope of financial consumers, the binding force of mediation mechanism, the setting of mediation institutions, the docking of litigation and mediation, and third, the implementation steps of the Financial Ombudsman System in China.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：D922.28;F832

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 王健輝;;淺析金融危機(jī)后我國金融消費(fèi)者的保護(hù)體系[J];商業(yè)文化(上半月);2011年12期

2 趙煊;;金融消費(fèi)市場(chǎng)掠奪性交易研究——以金融消費(fèi)者保護(hù)為視角[J];理論學(xué)刊;2013年01期

3 陸春瑋;徐犖彥;;仲裁在金融消費(fèi)糾紛多元化解決機(jī)制中的價(jià)值[J];上海保險(xiǎn);2013年06期

4 余峗;;金融消費(fèi)糾紛非訴解決機(jī)制研究[J];金融經(jīng)濟(jì);2014年14期

5 陳蓉泉;;基于金融消費(fèi)糾紛處理思路的新探討[J];特區(qū)經(jīng)濟(jì);2012年04期

6 邢會(huì)強(qiáng);;金融消費(fèi)糾紛多元化解決機(jī)制的構(gòu)建與對(duì)北京的建議[J];法學(xué)雜志;2011年02期

7 王瑩瑩;;論金融消費(fèi)關(guān)系的法律規(guī)制模式[J];金融教育研究;2012年06期

8 張建軍;陳永寧;李佳;;我國金融消費(fèi)糾紛處理現(xiàn)有途徑及重構(gòu)問題研究[J];甘肅金融;2014年01期

9 一良;;金融消費(fèi) 欲說維權(quán)好困惑[J];大陸橋視野;2003年07期

10 田俊領(lǐng);;淺議我國金融消費(fèi)權(quán)益保護(hù)問題及對(duì)策[J];金融理論與實(shí)踐;2013年09期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前10條

1 記者 胡萍;金融消費(fèi)者： 拿什么捍衛(wèi)自己的“金融權(quán)益”？[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2011年

2 白蕓;金融消費(fèi)：尷尬何時(shí)了[N];福建工商時(shí)報(bào);2000年

3 本報(bào)記者 王碩 王照重;部分代表、委員呼吁金融消費(fèi)維權(quán)立法再快點(diǎn)[N];中國消費(fèi)者報(bào);2013年

4 記者 雷和平　通訊員 劉百寧 陳讓元;聚集金融消費(fèi)正能量[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2013年

5 記者 程瑞華;共建和諧雙贏的金融消費(fèi)生態(tài)[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2013年

6 潘書蘭 范紅菊;構(gòu)建穩(wěn)健農(nóng)村金融消費(fèi)市場(chǎng)亟需政策支持[N];中國聯(lián)合商報(bào);2013年

7 徐澄濤;如何妥善處理金融消費(fèi)糾紛[N];江蘇法制報(bào);2013年

8 張榮智　鄭寶云 趙連發(fā) 王文超;建設(shè)和諧金融消費(fèi)生態(tài)[N];金融時(shí)報(bào);2013年

9 本報(bào)記者 聶國春;三中全會(huì)金改：金融消費(fèi)迎來新時(shí)代[N];中國消費(fèi)者報(bào);2013年

10 張慶森 本報(bào)記者 薛慶元;讓百姓金融消費(fèi)更放心[N];中國消費(fèi)者報(bào);2013年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 劉路華;金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制研究[D];南昌大學(xué);2015年

2 張?jiān)?金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制研究[D];遼寧大學(xué);2015年

3 吳愁;我國金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制研究[D];重慶大學(xué);2015年

4 曾俊;金融消費(fèi)ADR機(jī)制研究[D];湘潭大學(xué);2015年

5 曾繁榮;非訴訟金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制探討[D];江西財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2014年

6 嚴(yán)威;金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制研究[D];北方工業(yè)大學(xué);2014年

7 田野;我國金融消費(fèi)糾紛調(diào)解機(jī)制的構(gòu)建途徑[D];中國政法大學(xué);2014年

8 董秀秀;論大陸地區(qū)金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制的完善[D];西南政法大學(xué);2015年

9 張也;金融消費(fèi)糾紛解決機(jī)制研究[D];山東財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué);2014年

10 劉國燦;銀行業(yè)金融消費(fèi)糾紛非訴訟救濟(jì)機(jī)制探討[D];暨南大學(xué);2014年

，

本文編號(hào)：1936072