CIO rejects single financial services tribunal
The Credit and Investments Ombudsman (CIO) has rejected the Coalition Members' recommendation that a single tribunal should be established for all financial services complaints.
The CIO said the recommendation to the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Economics in their report on the Big Four banks was a political solution to the reputation problems of the Big Four.
CIO chief executive and ombudsman, Raj Venga, said: "Unfortunately it is the innocent smaller players within the financial services sector who will pay the price. This is clearly a win for the big four banks".
"The Tribunal solution, or indeed one which involves a single ombudsman scheme, will force all small financial services providers to join a scheme which is set up to deal with the big four banks," Venga said.
"This is all fine if we want our financial system to remain uncompetitive. Larger dominant providers can afford high costs and simply pass the inefficiency on to consumers in the form of high rates and charges.
"If we want efficiency for the benefit of all consumers and the economy, we need a system of dispute resolution which facilitates increased competitiveness in financial services."
The CIO called on the Government to target its response to the problems in the sector and to the organisations which had caused them.
"If a tribunal is politically necessary, we suggest that its scope is limited to the areas that the existing Ombudsman schemes do not cover," Venga said.
"This way the very successful Ombudsman schemes already operating in Australia will be left alone to continue their highly valuable work."
Recommended for you
As the industry navigates the fallout from recent product failures, two major AFSLs have detailed their APL selection process and relationship with research houses, warning a selection error could “destroy” a licensee.
The impending retirement of financial advisers in their 50s could see the profession face significant succession challenges over the coming decade and younger advisers may not be the answer.
With a third of AFSLs being solo advisers, how can they navigate key person risk and ensure they are still attractive propositions for buyers when it comes to their succession planning?
A quarter of advisers who commenced on the FAR within the last two years have already switched licensees or practices, adding validity to practice owners’ professional year (PY) concerns.
