Bad banks and super funds to be named and shamed

ASIC has given the AFCA approval to name financial firms in its determinations.

Bad funds to be named and shamed

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has approved changes that will allow the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) to name and shame financial firms in its published determinations.

An ASIC statement said that naming the firms would help identify conduct or market problems within organisations, specific products or services.

In AFCA’s first six months of operation, it received 35,263 complaints.

While the publication of determinations has been a longstanding feature of the external dispute resolution schemes in Australia, the names of firms involved in financial services, superannuation and credit complaints have not been published to date.

People who make a complaint against a financial firm will continue to remain anonymous under the rule changes.

ASIC explained that the rule changes would also highlight where financial firms had done the right things.

“It will also enhance transparency and accountability of firms’ performance in complaints handling and of AFCA’s own decision-making,” the ASIC statement explained.

AFCA will shortly be issuing updated operational guidelines that set out examples of the circumstances in which a determination naming a financial firm would not be published. This includes where naming may expose confidential information about a firm’s systems or policies. 

Naming firms in AFCA determinations is part of a broader set of reforms aimed at increasing transparency in financial services. This includes parliament giving ASIC the power to collect and publish internal dispute resolution data.

Do you agree that financial firms and super funds should be named and shamed in AFCA determinations? Do you think this will encourage better behaviour by banks?

If you enjoy our content, don’t keep it to yourself. Share our free eNews with your friends and encourage them to sign up.

RELATED ARTICLES





    COMMENTS

    To make a comment, please register or login
    4b2
    28th Aug 2019
    10:11am
    Naming and shaming is one thing. I'm still waiting for jail terms to be handed out for the misdeeds of the Bankers and others from the Royal Commission. But I wont hold my breath while this current government is still running the protection racket for the iondustry.
    greenie
    28th Aug 2019
    6:05pm
    Just like the crooked Labor Party receiving illegal donations - yes?
    nimbus
    28th Aug 2019
    10:32am
    I have been ripped off by my "Financial Advisor" firm to the tune of $24,600
    over a period of 15 years.
    They have offered to refund deducted funds going back only to 2013 when ASIC deemed them to be illegal. And they did not include monies for the loos of income ($3,100)
    What course of action can I take to obtain the return of funds going back beyond 2013 to 2004 when my super account was rolled over by these financial leaches and they latched onto my savings.
    I have never heard one word from my "Financial Advisor in 15 years
    Lippy
    28th Aug 2019
    11:36am
    Like the article, tell them your ready to name & shame them. They are offering a refund, sounds like they just admitted to doing something wrong. Don't let the bastards away with anything. They got rich from ripping people off.
    KSS
    28th Aug 2019
    1:00pm
    nimbus you posted this the other day with the additional information that you cannot add the $10,000 they will refund to you back into superannuation.

    I posted then:

    You cannot contribute to super if it is in pension phase. So you have basically two choices: spend it or save/invest it elsewhere.

    Look at it as a windfall. You didn't have it. You didn't miss it or you would have done something about it 15 years ago or 10 years ago or five years ago. You would have seen the deductions had youy checked your super statements at least once a year. It is pretty churlish to complain about lost interest and investment gains now.
    danielboonjp
    28th Aug 2019
    2:16pm
    nimbus ... what are you waiting for? just name them
    danielboonjp
    28th Aug 2019
    2:14pm
    ETHICAL INVESTMENT FUND
    Refused me death insurance from April 2017 and then in 2019 stole death insurance premium from my minute super payout ...ethical my arse
    danielboonjp
    28th Aug 2019
    2:18pm
    I have also heard SunSuper (nothing to do with Suncorp) are real bastards in withholding funds and denying death claims
    Tanker
    28th Aug 2019
    3:19pm
    The question is here is it SunSuper or their the insurance company they deal with as they are usually separate entities. We all know what insurance companies can be like altho' my personal experience, to date, has been positive with the ones I have been with.
    Tanker
    28th Aug 2019
    3:19pm
    The question is here is it SunSuper or their the insurance company they deal with as they are usually separate entities. We all know what insurance companies can be like altho' my personal experience, to date, has been positive with the ones I have been with.
    KSS
    28th Aug 2019
    5:37pm
    Seems pretty straightforward really you are dead or your not! However many death policies will not pay out if the death was at your own hand ie suicide for example, drunk driving etc. So perhaps it was the cause of death that was the problem, not the being dead part.
    And we all know it is the duty of any insurance company to find any excuse not to pay out.
    danielboonjp
    28th Aug 2019
    3:38pm
    Tanker.
    we are usually assessed by the company we keep.
    Super funds get kick-backs from insurance companies, that translates to a representative of said insurance company, to pretend its out of their hands is a deliberate lie.
    MICK
    28th Aug 2019
    5:22pm
    Love it.
    Where are the government funded trolls who always support banks and Retail Super Funds? Nowhere to be seen.
    GeorgeM
    28th Aug 2019
    7:20pm
    "Do you agree that financial firms and super funds should be named and shamed in AFCA determinations? Do you think this will encourage better behaviour by banks?"
    Yes, and yes.

    However, there seems to be no action to pre-empt the Greed factor driving these bad behaviours which are the massive bonuses at the top levels i.e. CEOs, etc. Govt needs to cap size of bonuses, and ASIC needs to have powers to review and stop bonuses by measuring performance against customer service targets measured by independent surveys. A new way is needed to fix this greed-driven culture.