Stampa

INVESTIGATION OPENED INTO UNICREDIT, INTESA, MPS AND BNL OVER ALLEGED ANTI-COMPETITIVE AGREEMENT IN PROVIDING GENERAL CASHIER SERVICE TO INAIL


PRESS RELEASE



PRESS RELEASE



BANKS: ANTITRUST AUTHORITY OPENS INVESTIGATION INTO UNICREDIT, INTESA, MPS AND BNL OVER ALLEGED ANTI-COMPETITIVE ARRANGEMENT IN GENERAL CASHIER SERVICE FOR INAIL
 
Banks said to have coordinated their tendering
 so as to retain the contract originally awarded them in 1997


        The Italian Competition Authority, at its meeting on 28 May 2007, decided to open an investigation into  Unicredit, Intesa, MPS and BNL over an alleged anti-competitive arrangement in providing INAIL's general cashier service .

        The parties were advised of the decision today, during the course of inspections carried out by the Authority's officials, with the collaboration of the Special Team for Market Protection and for Computer Fraud of the Customs and ExcisePolice.

        In the Authority's view, the results of no fewer than four requests for bids by INAIL for the carrying out of the service, beginning in February 2002, indicate the possible existence of coordinated action by these four banks that won the contract as an RTI (temporary corporate grouping) when bids were requested on 13 April 1996. The alleged coordination seems to have been designed to ensure that on subsequent occasions no bids would be submitted, in order to continue jointly carrying out the service, thus avoiding any real competitive comparison.

        The general cashier service contracted out by INAIL includes, amongst other things, the management of financial operations relating to the Institute's accounting, the management of the line of credit and related dealings with the former Central State Treasury, the possible advance of cash in the case of lack of liquidity in its current accounts, custodial and administrative services for securities owned by the Institute and payment of staff and temporary disability benefits.

        The three tendering processes following expiry of the contract (in 2003, 2004 and 2005) were never successfully completed due to the lack of two valid bids, an essential prerequisite for letting the contract: in the Authority's view, this is a significant anomaly. Similarly, the structure of the corporate grouping itself, set up for the three bids, is hard to see as resulting from an individually rational choice by the banks to participate in the RTI in order to make a bid for assignment of the contract.

        The fourth request for bids, in February 2006, whose results were initially suspended by INAIL, also produced anomalies.

        In conclusion, the Authority believes that the four banks, over time, acted in a coordinated fashion in the tendering process so as to prevent the contract being let and oblige INAIL to extend the original contract they had won. In this manner it seems they obstructed, or at least limited, the competitive process in order to maintain their own market positions over time. The investigation must be completed by 30 June 2008.


Rome, 5 June 2007