Europe is raising the bar on CX as contact centres catch up
- Tim Meredith
Table of contents
Across Europe, regulators are becoming far more explicit about what “good customer service” actually means, particularly where automation and AI sit between a customer and help.
The pattern is consistent across markets. Outcomes matter. Access to a human agent matters. Speed of response matters. Whether customers can actually resolve issues matters.
Recent analysis from Cavell, including their Cloud Conversations podcast, captures this shift clearly. Consumer-focused legislation is accelerating, and regulators are stepping in where automated experiences create friction, dead ends, or unacceptably poor service.
For operations leaders and CX or contact centre managers, the implication is practical rather than philosophical:
- If your service model relies on automation, you need a reliable human service layer behind it.
- If you operate voice support, you need to be able to prove performance across answer times, queues, and agent effectiveness.
Consumer-focused legislation is accelerating, and regulators are stepping in where automated experiences create friction, dead ends, or unacceptably poor service.
Regulation is moving closer to queue experience
Historically, consumer protection rules focused on disclosure, fairness of terms, and redress after something went wrong. Increasingly, regulators are paying attention to how customers are served in the first place.
That shift reflects how customer journeys have changed. Many customers now encounter automated systems as the default entry point, and “support” can become a maze of bots, self-service flows, and deflection strategies.
Cavell’s analysis highlights the tension well. Automation continues to advance, but regulators are intervening where it undermines service quality or blocks access to human support. This trend also sits alongside broader European AI governance, which emphasises accountability, transparency, and human oversight in customer-facing contexts (see the European Commission’s overview of AI regulation in the EU).
For contact centre leaders, this brings two operational questions into sharp focus:
- Can customers reach a capable human when it matters?
- Can the organisation evidence service quality and responsiveness?
How this is playing out across Europe
Spain: explicit constraints on automated-only service
Spain currently provides the clearest example of customer service expectations becoming operational requirements.
Legal commentary on Spain’s Customer Service Law highlights:
- Prohibitions on automated-only answering systems
- Guaranteed access to a human agent on request
- Service principles covering accessibility, inclusion, and effectiveness
A detailed legal analysis is available from Osborne Clarke.
Public reporting on the law frequently references limits on telephone waiting or hold times, often described as a “three-minute” standard, for example in coverage from ThinkSpain.
The Spanish government confirmed parliamentary approval of the Customer Service Law in late 2025, underlining that this is no longer theoretical policy (La Moncloa).
For CX leaders, this moves queue design, capacity planning, and escalation routes firmly into governance territory and not just a reputation, retention, and customer loyalty issue.
Italy: sector-led enforcement, especially in essential services
Italy illustrates how stricter service expectations typically emerge first in regulated or essential sectors.
The Italian Regulatory Authority for Energy, Networks and Environment (ARERA) oversees service standards in electricity, gas, and related utilities. ARERA has actively assessed call centre service quality and customer satisfaction, signalling that accessibility and responsiveness are treated as regulated concerns in these sectors.
ARERA’s work on evaluating call centre quality for energy and gas providers is documented in its consumer-facing materials, including its call centre quality assessments (ARERA – Call Centre Quality).
Even where legislation does not set universal KPIs, the expectation is clear: in regulated industries, measurable service outcomes increasingly matter.
Portugal: structured complaint handling and response discipline
Portugal’s consumer protection framework places strong emphasis on structured complaint handling.
The country’s “complaints book” mechanism, including electronic complaints, reinforces expectations around timely responses. Guidance from Portugal’s telecoms regulator ANACOM states that electronic complaints should receive a response within 15 working days (ANACOM).
Independent legal commentary echoes the same expectation, for example in analysis published by Dower Law Firm.
Operationally, this drives the need for disciplined workflows, clear ownership, and evidence that complaints are handled consistently and on time.
Poland: tightening expectations around complaint handling
Poland’s consumer protection regime has been evolving, influenced by EU directives and national implementation.
Legal analysis from international law firms describes a tightening and standardisation of complaint-handling obligations, increasing expectations around response handling, consistency, and accountability (Bird & Bird).
While this does not translate into specific call answer-time rules, it raises the bar for visibility, escalation, and auditable resolution processes.
Germany: governance and transparency over headline KPIs
Germany does not currently have a single, high-profile customer service KPI comparable to Spain’s widely reported hold-time limits.
Instead, pressure comes from a strong consumer protection culture and increasing expectations around governance when AI and automation are used in customer-facing contexts. This is reflected in legal and regulatory analysis of Germany’s AI and consumer protection frameworks, such as the Chambers AI Practice Guide for Germany.
For contact centres, the implication is structural: clear disclosure, reliable escalation routes, and an audit trail that shows customers are not being trapped in automation loops.
United Kingdom: outcome-driven standards through enforcement and sector rules
Still closely aligned with the EU in terms of regulations that defend consumer rights and positive customer outcomes, the UK is moving in a similar direction.
In regulated sectors, the Financial Conduct Authority’s Consumer Duty requires firms to deliver good outcomes for retail customers. While not a call-centre-specific rule, it directly affects how service operations are designed, monitored, and evidenced.
More broadly, the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024 strengthens consumer enforcement powers, increasing scrutiny of poor or misleading service practices.
Separately, Ofcom has issued guidance on protecting customers during the migration away from traditional PSTN services, reinforcing the importance of reliable voice service during transitions (Ofcom).
Ireland: rising expectations through sector frameworks
Ireland shows a similar pattern to the UK, with service expectations shaped primarily through sector regulation.
The Central Bank of Ireland has published a revised Consumer Protection Code, due to take effect in March 2026. The updated code strengthens expectations around fair treatment, complaints handling, and customer outcomes.
In communications, Ireland’s regulator ComReg sets expectations around customer charters and complaints handling, forming part of the broader consumer protection framework (ComReg).
What this means for contact centre strategy
Across these markets, the regulatory message is consistent even where the mechanisms differ.
- Automation is allowed.
- Poor service is not.
- “We tried” is no longer a sufficient defence.
Voice remains strategically important within omnichannel
Voice remains one of the fastest routes to resolution when issues are complex, sensitive, or emotionally charged. Regulatory emphasis on human accessibility reinforces its role as a core service channel rather than a fallback.
Modern cloud-based contact centres make it possible to scale voice and messaging support, enable distributed teams, and adapt to demand without heavy structural commitments.
Monitoring performance is not optional
As regulators focus on outcomes, performance metrics take on an additional role as evidence of governance rather than just KPIs to drive commercial outcomes.
Contact centre leaders should be able to demonstrate:
- Time to answer by queue or skill group
- Time to reach a human agent from automated entry points
- Abandonment and repeat contact rates
- Consistency of agent performance and call quality
- Resolution timelines and follow-up discipline
Rather than just focusing on micromanaging agents, it’s important to understand whether a service model actually works for customers and to be able to show it.
Where AI fits in a regulated service environment
European regulation is aimed at making organisations responsible and accountable, rather than stopping automation or AI.
In contact centres, the AI applications that align best with this direction tend to support better outcomes rather than replace human interaction. Examples include call summarisation, quality assurance support, trend analysis, and real-time assistance for agents during calls.
Used this way, AI strengthens visibility, consistency, and accountability rather than obscuring service gaps.
Looking ahead
Across Europe, consumer regulation is converging on a simple expectation.
Customers should not be stranded in automated loops.
Service should be reachable, effective, and provable.
For operations leaders and CX managers, this means treating contact centre performance as an aspect of governance and not just good customer service. Voice, when combined with modern monitoring and analytics, remains one of the most reliable ways to meet both customer needs and regulatory expectations.
Organisations that invest in scalable voice capabilities and clear performance visibility will feel the benefits first in customer experience, but that doesn’t mean using high-cost, bloated enterprise vendors with multi-year contracts. Thankfully that market is dying, albeit slowly.
For customer-facing organisations, regulatory risk tends to surface later, once patterns of poor service become visible. By then, the compliance gap is harder to close, so better to make sure you’ve got a platform in place that scales easily in terms of performance and cost today.
Read this post in:
More from the blog
Want to improve your business communication?
Unlock enterprise-class call center power at affordable prices – no hardware, no delays, no surprises!
