If there is no cash and the businesses cannot get banking services? It could be dictating community morals by stealth.
Excepting if my former suggestion has merit it would be right on!
But a decade ago just being a US citizen was enough to be denied banking services in some areas because of the onerous US laws introduced (FATCA and FINCEN) that any financial institution with a US branch was beholden to enforce. Lucky for me Australia rolled over quickly and agreed.
To the topic at hand, American’s morals are far less accepting of real world human behaviour than most western countries so the underlying problem could be in Canberra, or further away in Washington, and obscured by complex regulatory issues our banks do not want to deal with, so do not, or try not to?
Unravelling the real reasons nothing has been done to provide banking service to all legal entities and businesses and residents even after years of the problem being flagged suggests a healthy bit of scepticism is in order as to the why’s.
An email update frpm Choice regarding banking reforms.
I’ve just delivered your petition calling on the government to pass two key reforms that were recommended by the banking royal commission. These crucial laws will ensure that victims of financial crime are compensated and finance executives are held to account for misconduct. Thank you for adding your voice.
Thanks to your public support our campaign has made waves. Here’s what we’ve achieved together:
The petition reached over 21,000 signatures, with thousands of you sharing widely across social media and with friends and family
Industry groups, professional accounting bodies and community legal centres joined CHOICE in calling for these crucial banking royal commission reforms to be implemented without further delay
We’ve met with government, opposition and independent crossbench offices to share your concerns, and advocate for strong laws to be passed as soon as possible
This campaign has momentum because of people like you adding your voice. With the amount of sustained media coverage, we know Treasurer Josh Frydenberg is feeling the pressure.
Read more about the campaign in our latest article:
So what happens now? The petition is with Treasurer Josh Frydenberg to consider, but we have to keep up the pressure to get these crucial reforms over the line. We’re pushing for both draft laws to be introduced (and strengthened) in Parliament in the next few weeks.
I’ll be in touch again soon with the next steps of this important campaign.
Thanks for your ongoing support,
We’re CHOICE; the Australian Consumers’ Association
57 Carrington Rd Marrickville, NSW, 2204.
Anyone else notice that the ABC’s first headline for this article was a bit “too much” for the ABC and that the ABC has now bowdlerised it? i.e. if you were to link the exact same article today then the headline as shown in the Choice forum with the link would be different (“Sex shop owners frustrated by banking ban”).
While AMP’s handling of this case looks a bit mean-spirited, it should serve as a cautionary tale for all customers … DON’T USE your work email for things that do not relate to doing your job.
I think there’s another lesson in there too … DON’T BUNDLE superannuation with life insurance. (Bundling is something that the government itself is discouraging in some ways, and that contributed to the problem in this case.)
The Federal Court has fined Dixon Advisory and Superannuation Services Limited (Dixon Advisory) $7.2 million over the failure of 6 of their representatives to keep their clients best interests as the basis of their advice. This Court action was brought about by ASIC against Dixon Advisory, ASIC’s Court costs of $800,000 was also ordered against Dixon Advisory.
The breaches of the requirement occurred over a period of about 3 1/2 years up to 2019. Dixon Advisory are currently in Voluntary Administration and it is not clear if they will recommence business.
An important notice in the ASIC release
“ Former clients of Dixon Advisory may be eligible for compensation under a potential future Compensation Scheme of Last Resort (CSLR) but will need to take action as soon as possible (22-205MR).
Former clients who believe they have suffered loss as a result of the misconduct of Dixon Advisory and/or their former Dixon Advisory financial adviser should make a complaint to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA). Lodging a complaint with AFCA is a necessary step for clients to preserve their possible eligibility under a potential future CSLR.
If a former client of Dixon Advisory has already lodged their complaint with AFCA there is no need for them to do anything further at this time.”