Federal Court proceedings have been ongoing since December 2019, when ASIC alleged that NAB failed to issue or issued defective FDSs.
NAB has admitted to a number of the breaches levied against them as a result of the case.
“We sincerely apologise to those customers who were impacted by this issue,” NAB Group Executive, Legal and Commercial Services, Sharon Cook said.
NAB has stated that it is continuing to make amends for the mistake.
“To address this issue, NAB stopped charging ongoing service fees to customers of its former NAB Financial Planning business in 2019,” Ms Cook stated.
“In 2020, we established a remediation program which has to date paid approximately $31m to more than 15,000 customers in order to make things right”.
The fine will go to the general accounts and not pay for the running of ASIC. Yet we work 50 and 60 hour weeks and get lumped with bills we cannot even budget for!
its another WTF moment …!!
Before everyone starts banging on about banks etc make sure your own FDS’s are compliant. Commpay is not accurate and out by a month. We now have someone in the business who’s job it is to check it to the cent … More costs and more time!
Oh yes, and the fact that many providers charge the customer 2.5% GST and pay us 10% GST is another nice wrinkle.
no one is going to argue with you there. ASIC current approach is if the apostrophe is in the wrong place it’s “defective”. Spelling mistake…defective….grammatical mistake….defective…..three phone calls promised but two delivered…defective…The Difference is ASIC wants to drive out IFA’s, but we actually delivered “services”.
That’s not remotely what ASIC’s current approach is.
Well then, don’t just stand there, tells us all you know about the current approach being take by ASIC re FDS’s.
I take it you have not been through an ASIC look back program going back to 2009….and you joined this industry yesterday. ASIC wants to kill off face to face advice.
There is a big difference between Failing to Issue FDS or a defective FDS if it was a minor defect.
Would more in line with Failing to issue, that’s a significant defect.
Ah the Big Banks just don’t learn do they 🙁
Could it be that the FDS’ produced by the financial advisers stated a service, that the client had paid for, was provided, when it was not = fee for no service?
No, that is a completely different issue. Please know you facts. It is more likely a typo, rounding error, GST error as stated above etc.
Are the executives and managers going to go to jail or are the financial planners going to get blamed, as usual!
It worked well before didn’t it…….rinse and repeat…get the FPA on your side…get ready for FASEA Mark 2.
Poor shareholders…I wager that not one executive bonus will be affected…
At least the penalty fits the mistake. Be a day late 10 years ago and you have to pay back 10 years’ of fees. With interest.
Imagine if the penalty would be out of proportion to the transgression.