• Contact
  • Feedback
Banking Day
Stay Ahead. Stay Informed.
Concise. Candid. Provocative.
Get the daily banking news that matters
Banking Day – Your trusted source for independent financial insights.
Subscribe Now
  • News
  • Topics
    • All Topics
    • Briefs
    • Major Banks
    • Authorised deposit-taking institutions
    • Insurance, funds and super
    • Payments, mobile & wallets
    • Consumer lending
    • Mortgages
    • Business lending
    • Finance regulation
    • Debt capital markets
    • Ratings agencies
    • Equity capital markets
    • Professional services
    • Work & career
    • Foreign news
    • Other topics
  • Free Trial
  • Subscribe
  • Resources
    • Industry events
  • About us
    • About Banking Day
    • Advertise
    • Feedback
    • Contact Banking Day
  • Search
  • Login
  • My account
    • Account settings
    • User Admin
    • Logout

Login or request a free trial

AFCA determines to name banks

07 June 2019 4:03PM
In a significant departure from the practices of its predecessor organisations, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority plans to identify financial institutions in its published decisions.AFCA has released a consultation paper and draft rules setting out its plan, which it says is part of its commitment to being "open, transparent and accountable to the public".AFCA says other ombudsman schemes already do this, including the UK Financial Ombudsman Service.Currently, rule 14.5 of the AFCA scheme requires AFCA to publish determinations in a form that does not identify any of the parties. The proposed change would allow AFCA to identify the financial service provider but no other parties.One submission to AFCA seen by Banking Day says the ombudsman needs to make clear whether the rule change would have retrospective effect. Questions of fairness might arise if there is retrospectivity, the submission says.The submission also argues that "naming and shaming" some financial institutions in the post-Hayne environment "is likely to cause inappropriate and unfair commercial damage to named businesses".It also argues that it would be unfair to name finance aggregators when a dispute involves one of its representatives. The aggregator may have no control over the conduct complained about.And it says naming and shaming would be inappropriate in disputes where the issue is minor, such as misunderstandings or service standards.

I'm a returning subscriber

*
Password reset *
Login

Request a free trial

  • Emailing you the news at 7am.
  • Covering core lending and funding issues, strategy, payments, regulation, risk management, IT, marketing and more.
  • Original news and summaries of major stories from other media – ditch your newspaper subscriptions.
  • Focused on banking and finance, saving you the time spent wading through newspapers and other services.
  • With reporting from former editors and senior writers from the AFR and The Australian.
  • Configured for your phone, laptop and PC.
Free trial Banking Day
Stay Ahead. Stay Informed.
Concise. Candid. Provocative.
Get the daily banking news that matters
Banking Day – Your trusted source for independent financial insights.
Subscribe Now

Consumer lending

  • Latitude, Harvey Norman liable for interest free GO card con

Copyright © WorkDay Media 2003-2025.

Banking Day is a WorkDay Media publication

WorkDay Media Unit Trust

  • Privacy policy
  • Terms of access and use