The immediate repeal of the provision stipulating that a debt restructuring agreement through the out-of-court mechanism constitutes an enforceable title, the retention and substantial strengthening of the Code of Conduct, and the mandatory submission of a restructuring proposal without an upfront payment are what EKPIZO is calling for following the withdrawal of Article 23 from the Ministry of National Economy and Finance’s bill on loan and credit servicers (servicers).
In a statement, the association said the withdrawal of Article 23—which would have made debt restructuring agreements between borrowers and banks or debt-servicing companies enforceable titles—was an obvious step to avoid disrupting the legal order.
EKPIZO recalls that it recently voiced its opposition to the provision in a hearing before the relevant parliamentary committee, arguing that recognising an out-of-court restructuring agreement as an enforceable title unduly strengthens creditors’ position and creates risks to legal certainty.
It also says that safeguards for effective judicial protection are undermined, as consumers—particularly the most vulnerable—have fewer opportunities to seek timely and meaningful judicial review of claims made against them.
However, the association notes that a similar provision remains in force under the out-of-court debt settlement mechanism, through the online platform established by Law 4738/2020. Specifically, it points to paragraphs 3 and 4 of Article 27 of the law, as amended by Law 5313/2026, which provide that the debt restructuring agreement constitutes an enforceable title.
According to EKPIZO, if a debtor is unable to service the arrangement, even temporarily, creditors can move immediately to seize assets, including the debtor’s primary residence, without first obtaining a payment order, which the debtor could challenge.
It argues that this bypasses the stage at which the claim is reviewed, along with the review of whether it is lawful to treat the debtor as having defaulted under the restructuring agreement, and removes the possibility of obtaining a stay of enforcement.
The association also points to general terms in agreements made under the out-of-court mechanism which it describes as abusive and unlawful, arguing that they safeguard only the interests of creditors.
It also opposes the legitimisation of exorbitant upfront payments for debt restructuring, both through the out-of-court mechanism and through bilateral agreements, as well as the planned abolition of the Code of Conduct, which, it says, is to be replaced by a new bilateral debt restructuring process that is not borrower-friendly.
EKPIZO is calling for the Code of Conduct to be retained and substantially improved, with clearer viability criteria and effective scrutiny of proposed arrangements.
The association’s specific demands are:
The immediate repeal of the provision that gives the out-of-court mechanism’s restructuring agreement the status of an enforceable title.
The retention and substantial strengthening of the Code of Conduct.
The mandatory submission of a debt restructuring proposal without an upfront payment.