Upcoming changes to dispute resolution: the new Australian Financial Complaints Authority

Twitter
LinkedIn
Facebook

The Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) is the proposed new dispute resolution body for the financial sector. Last week, the Government announced the latest step in the establishment of this new body with the appointment of a transition team for its establishment.

australian financial complaints authority

By Dr Drew Donnelly, Compliance Quarter

In today’s article, we summarise the proposals to date for overhauling external dispute resolution in financial firms.

Note, that it is proposed that ‘financial firms’ be defined broadly so that the new framework will affect and apply to a vast range of businesses including:

  • All Australian Financial Services (AFS) licensees
  • credit providers
  • regulated superannuation funds
  • approved deposit funds
  • retirement savings account providers
  • and life policy funds and insurers.

The transitional arrangements

The focus for the newly appointed team is to ensure a smooth transition between the existing dispute resolution schemes, including the three existing dispute resolution bodies, the Financial Ombudsman Service, the Credit and Investments Ombudsman and the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal, into a new framework, including the establishment of Australian Financial Complaints Authority. This will be done in consultation with consumers, industry and the existing dispute resolution bodies.

When it comes into force on 1 July 2018, it is intended that the resulting framework will apply to all disputes between consumers and financial firms.

Matters that the transition team will advise the Government on include:

  • AFCA’s terms of reference
  • Governance and funding arrangements for AFCA
  • Recommendations on the authorisation process for AFCA
  • Transitional arrangements to settle ongoing disputes in the three existing schemes.

Why the new framework?

The Government commissioned an independent review of the existing system for external dispute resolution in financial services in response to complaints. The final report of the Review of the financial system external dispute resolution and complaints framework  identified several problems including:

  • Multiple external dispute resolution schemes meaning inconsistent outcomes for consumers with similar complaints
  • Multiple schemes meaning duplicated costs for industry and government
  • The monetary limits being too low to allow adequate redress for small businesses
  • Substantial delays in resolving superannuation complaints which might be helped by overhauling existing governance and accountability arrangements.

The exposure draft

In May, an exposure draft of the Bill that would establish this framework was released for public comment. Consultation is now closed and a finalised bill is yet to be introduced into Parliament.

The Bill does not establish the dispute resolution scheme itself, but a broad legislative framework that that would enable the Government to establish such a scheme.

Key features of the framework proposed in the exposure draft include:

  • A power of the responsible Minister to authorise a disputes resolution scheme with specified functions
  • Enhanced supervision powers for the Australian Securities & Investments Commission (ASIC), in relation to the scheme
  • new statutory powers in relation to the superannuation jurisdiction of the scheme including the power to join parties to a complaint and to obtain information.

For further information see the exposure draft and accompanying documentation.

More to explorer

werribee park mansion

Victoria consults on lower prices for embedded network customers

The Victorian Government has opened consultation on proposed pricing reforms for embedded networks, following its announcement that it intends to require lower energy prices for households and small businesses in those networks. The consultation is relevant to residential and small commercial embedded network customers, embedded network operators, exempt sellers and suppliers, licensed retailers operating in embedded networks, owners corporations, retirement villages, caravan parks, shopping centres and providers of bundled energy-related services such as bulk hot water, centralised heating and cooling.

smartphone beside a magnifying glass

Energy Retailer Assurance Audits in 2026: An Australian Guide

Assurance audits used to be a tick-the-box exercise. They are not anymore. With the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) refreshing its Compliance Procedures and Guidelines and releasing an updated Practice Guide for Compliance Audits last year energy retailers in Australia are operating in a sharper, more evidence-driven assurance environment than at any point in the National Energy Retail Law’s history. This post explains, in plain English, what an assurance audit looks like under the current settings, where the AER is looking hardest in 2025/26, and

street road near green and yellow trees

Embracing the uncertainty of rapid advancement and adoption of general artificial intelligence for energy businesses

The way businesses and professionals interact with artificial intelligence has changed. Over the past two months, we have observed a shift across our client base and the broader regulatory and legal community that goes beyond curiosity or experimentation. Professionals who were previously sceptical are now actively engaging with AI tools. Those who were already experimenting are finding that the tools have become materially more capable than they were even six months ago.

2 Comments

  • Russell White

    Does this mean that we should wait for the AFCA to be up & running before bringing on any issue that has perhaps fallen thru the cracks?
    For clarification, does this mean that any issue that either remains unresolved or has previously been precluded by any other investigative authority at this time, will be able to be regenerated for resolution once the AFCA is an operating entity?

  • Graham HESLOP

    Compensation to victims. To date I am not aware of any legislation regarding compensation. I see ASIC can get a $900 million fine for Breaches by the Banks etc. When I complained to ASIC and FOS they did not want to know or help me. The fines and special agreements that both ASIC and FOS conspired with the Banks etc went to the Federal Government coffers. Consolidated Revenue!!!!!
    When it is up and running AFCA has to act on behalf of the Citizen. After all they are the ones who commit suicide and have their lives crushed by unconscionable behaviour. My submission is the same as that of Mr Entsch of compensation 3 time multiplier. The Financial Sector can pay for this. It could be set up using the Residential Tenancies Authority in Queensland model as outlined in its Annual Report.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *