CHOICE membership

Discrimination against non mobile users


Not all banks. My bank is member owned so I don’t pay any fees on any of my accounts


'kinda makes you a shareholder :wink: One case where focus on shareholders is not a bad thing …


ME Bank was the first that came to mind, but I found is not the category you referenced. It is owned by the super funds and has no fee accounts, but still, In 1994, we were created to help everyday Australians reach the dream of owning their own home. These days we’re a fully-fledged bank, with profits going back to the industry super funds that own us. Those profits are called dividends most times :wink:

Then there are the myriad ‘customer owned’ banks that also have $0 fee accounts. More then I expected, and their association and list is here. I looked through a few of them for curiosity to compare with my ING accounts and excepting for the $0 fee (without provisos) their rates seem in keeping with their commercial competitors +/- delta.

I looked at one credit union in some depth and noted it is prohibited to distribute dividends to members in its constitution but has significant retained earnings. Those earnings don’t seem to go to lower interest rates for loans or higher interest for savings compared to ING, Rabo, and the second tiers, although most any of them easily beat the big four by at least a few tenths.

It was educational learning about the current state of credit unions/member owned banks, so thanks for the comment that got me looking!

I’ll close that most banks are fee free if you can deposit $1000 or $2000 pcm to the transaction account, bank dependent, and even many pensioners can do that; and there are often retiree accounts that offer nil to few fees while providing equally few benefits other than simplicity that could be appropriate for the aged who would be attracted to them.


Time to change your bank?


Except where “simple” and “secure” are in conflict. You may want simple and less secure, but I wouldn’t fault a bank for refusing to give you that - particularly as it only applies to larger transactions, say above $10,000.

I am more than happy for my bank to make it more difficult for someone to whisk $10,000 out of my account.

In the beginning, internet banking was single factor authentication i.e. you enter the password and you are good to go - but a password by itself has many known weaknesses. Two factor authentication is less simple, and more secure - and yes it is more hassle. If a bank wants to apply two factor authentication to larger transactions, they have my blessing.

For something that you only do once a year, you already have the workaround - do it in multiple $10,000 transactions, one per business day.


There seems to be an opinion by some that resembles “I’m all right Jack, so you don’t have a problem.”

The focus on customer service providing options for those who don’t have mobiles (or don’t have mobile coverage) was one of the focal issues in the thread. Some think ANZ’s policy is fine as is since they personally are happy, and others think they should have an alternative that works for them, in their circumstance, where they are.

Modern life, hacking, theft, and so on are parts of modern life and the ‘system’ is trying to respond, but seems ANZ is not interested in anyone’s problems but their own that may come down to a substandard ICT Security capability or sheer arrogance when viewed across the wide ranging continental situation. Covering 98% of us in metro areas and along the coast might not be impressive to those with dodgy service, some even in metro areas. For those following this link, note it is from 2014 and there have been programs to reduce black spots but programs remain ongoing. Contributors might have a different opinion if they were one of these folks (2018) or were in areas that were, are, and may still be worse into the future.

From a 2016 traveller’s blog, I accept this is not where the writer lived, but. The publican at Marree, who wanted to upload pics to a tourist-popular website, had to drive to Port Augusta, 380km away, to get a connection good enough for the job! True, not an SMS but indicative of the haves and have nots across the land.

Some companies seem to live in ivory towers in capital cities, so to speak, and never look beyond the horizon.


I think you’ve summed it up very nicely. Same thing applies to the NBN - some get connected and it works first time, so they say “What’s the problem?”

I just got connected last week, and thought that on the law of averages it wouldn’t go smoothly. Sure enough, they stuffed it up. At one point after it was connected I was getting emails telling me that it would be connected soon and to expect my new modem in the post. The fact that by this time I was actually connected and using the modem that had been delivered some time before didn’t seem to have penetrated their system!! :smiley:

So I agree, a problem is often only a problem if it’s your problem!


I don’t propose it I have it in use. The way it works in practice is after I click doit on a transaction the phone rings within about 10 seconds to give me a code. If the correct code isn’t entered within a certain time the transaction expires. So how does a third party have the incomplete transaction open and get the phone call at the same time in order to fake authentication?

Even if a landline is more risky than a mobile it is certainly better than single factor authentication, or are you saying I need to get a mobile just to do my banking?


To be clear …

Do you have a mobile phone?

Do you have mobile phone coverage at your house?


There are two issues that have been presented, one at the personal level and another at the ‘community’ level.


This has been successfully done where the code arrives on a mobile phone !

This (on a mobile phone) is a relatively sophisticated scam, requiring careful preparation. So 100% for sure you are better off from a security point of view having two factor authentication on a mobile phone than not having it.

There are differences as to how such a scam could work on a landline but I would not rule it out. Never underestimate the cleverness of the scammers.

However it has to be worth their while - and that’s where having a transaction limit (e.g. $10,000) is a big safety net. If you have no transaction limit (and enough money at all :slight_smile: ) then you make it worth their while.


At the “community” level, let’s say that a person does not have mobile phone coverage at their house and hence decides that it would be mostly pointless to have a mobile phone and certainly pointless for the purposes being discussed here (two factor authentication for internet banking transactions being done at home on a desktop / laptop using internet via, say, satellite or ADSL).

Here’s a left field proposal. Download and install an Android emulator and get the Android app (ANZ Shield in this case).

If you run the emulator on the computer that is doing the internet banking transaction then the app is basically pointless from a security point of view (both factors are on the hypothetically compromised device) but it could solve the problem.

Does it work? I have no idea.


My understanding is the account can be changed…

See section K of this form:

I expect that there will be costs associated with the change (e.g. from your financial adviser assisting with making all the necessary changes).

Maybe next meeting with your financial adviser/accountant, maybe ask the question about what it takes to change the account, the cost and time to see if it is possible and beneficial to do so.


I do have a mobile and coverage. It’s not that I cannot comply with their process, it’s that I don’t see the necessity. ANZ requires you to apply for a shield first, and then to receive texts and whatever else is involved. To the mobile 'phone user, this seems like a no brainer - but to someone who turns on his mobile rarely and already conducts banking without using it at all, I see no reason why I should have to go through that process when alternatives already exist. No doubt you see this as a pointless discussion, but we are progressively being forced to use smart phones for all manner of things, and for those of us who don’t want to go down that path it’s an annoyance.


Here is an even further left field scenario. An oldie does not have internet service nor a mobile, but rings into the call centre to try to arrange a funds transfer with ANZ or any equally inflexible organisation. Tedious and contrived but to make a point, how does that go with two factor?

The most reasonable answer would be voice prints with ANZ mated with callerID and the registered contact number, failing that happening sometimes, falling back to a ‘20 questions’ scenario to assure you are you. Depends on outlook whether X number of customers should each figure out how to deal with ‘it’, or the single service provider/business does it once :wink:

Visit a branch and get it done, assuming there is a branch? FWIW I have a US rellie who goes to her branch, whose staff log into her online account to do her transfers for her! She has never successfully logged into it more than once before needing another hand hold how to do it; she is beyond helping with computers (or phones other than making and receiving calls) and they assist her to pay bills. Her bank has (optional) two factor and sells it hard but also works with challenged customers. Therein lies a difference in banks and businesses re their relationships with their customers.


Hmmm. That’s why we’ve moved on to the generic “community”, who don’t have mobile coverage at all.

Hopefully though you do see the reason i.e. they are trying to protect you from losing $10,000. They don’t know how good you are at maintaining the security of your computer - but they do know that at any one time in Australia thousands of computers are in a compromised state, and yours could be one of them.

Maybe you want to have a play with an Android emulator.


I think the oldie has to go into the branch.

In some cases writing a cheque may work as an alternative. Has that been looked at as a workaround for the person who started this topic?


Thanks all for making the case for accommodating customers, options for the OP, and problems some Australians face when technology is essentially ‘metro-centric’ (ie depend on services that are scarce in some locales). I am closing the thread for a week to give the participants an opportunity to reflect on their viewpoints, and when reopened look forward to new thoughts being presented.

closed #79

opened #80

This topic was automatically opened after 5 days.