During a hearing yesterday, CBA chief executive Ian Narev told the House of Representatives standing committee on economics several times that the CommInsure-commissioned Deloitte review was considered by APRA to be robust and independent.
But Labor MP Matt Thistlethwaite said he was concerned that only 10 per cent of the claims reviewed were TPD claims, which typically have a higher denial rate.
“I understand that there were three engagement letters provided to Deloitte. We would like you to provide the engagement letters,” Mr Thistlethwaite said.
Mr Narev said while he was happy to review the letters and see if they are appropriate for reproduction, he does not believe the committee should have any concerns.
“We have an independent expert who has made it clear that it believes the sample was robust and we’ve got a regulator who is completely independent and has described the report as independent and robust,” he said.
Mr Thistlethwaite, however, accused CBA of hiding behind the report.
“That’s the thing … You find someone that you say is independent to hide behind. You find an organisation to hide behind to back you. You claim legal privilege on documents that otherwise prove cases against you,” he said.
“It’s more of this cover up. It’s the case that nothing’s changed.”
Mr Narev responded by saying that the other two CommInsure reports, conducted by EY and DLA Piper, will not be released publicly to protect customers and employees.
“The sole reason that we have maintained privilege is because customers and employees were encouraged to speak openly. As you can gather, given the positive nature of the conclusions, our preference would always be to release them,” he said.
“However, people will only be encouraged to speak openly on certain matters if they are guaranteed the reports will be privileged.”
Last week, CBA also defended the CommInsure review after Maurice Blackburn claimed it was not comprehensive enough, and that no claims staff were interviewed as part of the review.
Also last week, the committee grilled NAB for not terminating a former financial adviser.
I think we should let CBA’s reputation and previous behaviour speak for themself…..no sorry I don’t think Narev would want but hey “it’s different this time”
I agree with “Bitter Risky” above and his comments. I have a very positive experience with Comminsure and a Trauma Claim. Client near 50 Years old had a series of TIA’s (mini strokes) and after things settled I suggested that we should put in a claim and may be receive a partial payment from her substantial trauma policy. Following provision of medical evidence the claim was honored not as partial but for the full amount plus a $35,000 extra bonus. I applaud Comminsure for the way that was handled and suggest that those questioning the claims look at where the insurance is held. My bet is that they are attached to Award Super and accepted under automatic acceptance (no underwriting)
While I strongly suspect the CBA has done its absolute best to hand pick only the best and most positive information from this APRA Review, I find it laughable that a Labor MP has the cheek to be concerned about the integrity of a review. If anyone knows how to mask a review or coverup a white collar crime, it’ll be an MP from within the Labor Party.
and of course the 20+ LNP ministers stood down over corruption in the past 5 years? Cut the partisan crap out will you! Narev’s explanation and obfuscating would be there no matter who asked the question from either side of the aisle. The push from the public (and the ALP/Greens) for an RC is strong, and CBA have NOT bathed themselves in glory with their FPs casting a blight on ALL of us.