CHOICE membership

Royal Commission into the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry



This is a very interesting thread.

At the moment I work for one of the big four banks, but not in banking, but in the technology side.

My personal opinion is that BRC investigation should have happened a few year ago, before things become this much of an issue.

The bankers, lending officers are rewarded based on sales. Even though I’m an employee of the bank, as far as the bankers are concerned I’m another customer. So as you’d expect, if you are going to open a new account, there’s plenty of people to help you. But for other things, there’s not much enthusiasm from the bankers side.

So, it’s same as other services in Australia. They want to get new customers, but retaining the current customers is not that important. So, as customers you should not be loyal to anyone.

There are certain products that I use and there are certain products I don’t use with my employer. Therefore, I’d recommend that everyone do their research when it comes to selecting products and services, regardless how much they are pushed by pushy salesman.

The group of people that abuse this systems the most if the mortgage brokers. I know a few people who could not get a loan directly from a bank, but went through a broker and got the loan. What the broker does it not report certain information such as dependents which the bank/lender has no way of verifying.

I have also interacted with mortgage brokers and my experience if not pleasant. All of them tried to get a loan approved for an amount more than I needed. I would imagine that’s good for their sales numbers. None of them chose the best product for me - instead went with the product that benefited them the most.

A few of my friends told me that their brokers actually asked them to refinance after a while with a different lender even though they weren’t interested. So obviously they are making more money by switching people from one lender to another. Basically they are iSelects of the mortgage :stuck_out_tongue: world

Being said all those, we all had to undergo compliance training and it taught us about APRA regulations, anti-money laundering, conflict of interest, cartel (anti-competitive) behavior and how to identify and avoid those situations. So the bank actually wants all the employees to behave honestly and ethically. That’s one of the core message in the training.

Further more the big four banks are among the top fix tax paying companies in Australia. Additionally they employee thousands of Australians.

If you compare that to Apple, Google, Nike and other international companies who just pays peanuts compared to their earnings, I’d say banks are doing a good job.

So I hope that the BRC will hold banks accountable and honest and transparent. But I hope it will not negatively impact the stability of those because that will impact the Australian economy.


Um… that’s just a thing. We all have to pay tax and if you make big profits you pay big tax (supposedly). I don’t see how this statement is relevant. And just because they employ thousands of Australians doesn’t give them the green light to screw everyone else.


And today in the ABC

“The study said banks and credit card companies were in the midst of a revenue bonanza with interest being reaped on $31.7 billion of that $45 billion debt figure.”
I’m not a math professor but that figure is ridiculous.


It’s relavent because whether you like it or not, if one of those go bankrupt, the it will have a very negative impact on the Australian economy.

I have given enough evidence in my post about unethical conduct.

Mate, just read the whole thing and comment. You have taken things out of context and jumping up down.


OK, I appreciate that you work for one of the big banks and are concerned for your job but you’re one of “thousands” in that role whereas I’m speaking from the position of one of millions so I can’t really get behind the statement “like it or not, if one of those go bankrupt, the it will have a very negative impact on the Australian economy”.
That is exactly why we needed this royal commission and we can only hope that it will be effective. I, for one, do not want to have to help bail out the banks again!


It seems that you don’t see a correlation between any of the big four failing and the impact to the economy as a result, which in turn impact the millions that you are “representing”.

If I’m speaking on the behalf of the banks, shouldn’t I be saying let one or two of them fail so that the remaining get a bigger share? Wouldn’t that be “good for you my job”?

Anyways, I don’t see any point in arguing with you. You can comment what ever you want, I won’t reply again to you.


I apologise if I offended you DDS as that was not my intention. This is a forum for discussion and debate so if someone agrees or doesn’t agree with someone then that’s what keeps the conversation moving.

I do hope that you don’t stop putting forward your personal opinion as that is what we are all doing here.


We appreciate and welcome the different opinions that are shared on this forum, even when we disagree. Personal attacks or comments that detract from the discussion will be removed. Thanks to everyone who has contributed to the thread so far, it has been a great discussion.


This is the same pothole in the road that they the USA found themselves in after the GFC, they made it so important that the businesses had to be supported as they were “too big to fail” as they put it. Yet many with expertise in these areas said it was better for them to fail and new players would come into the market to replace them. In the US they ignored this and propped up the fails with huge amounts of public money, the bankers then awarded themselves bonuses. In Iceland they didn’t do this propping up, suffered for a little bit and now have a much more ethical and balanced finance industry, I also add they jailed most of the big bankers CEOs, Chairmen etc as well.

The result in the US and we now have are Banks and other financial industries are reaping benefits off the back of totally unethical and indeed illegal behaviour. They should have been allowed to fail if they were going to, we should have prosecuted those who had participated in the mess, and as you said should have had this inquiry years ago, but we didn’t and ordinary everyday Australians have been paying the price ever since for those failures to act.


Is it reasonable to argue we the customer have paid the price many times over already maintaining the status quo with our financial systems and practices?

Wether this is true or not the BRC is going to ensure we are all better informed, and hopefully provide for a better future.

Many of us - mainly ‘every day baby boomers’ have spent up to 50 years supporting the past system and practices blindly ignorant of how it worked. Some of the rorts perpetrated on us have come at the end of our working lives when we had the most to give and most to loose.

Hopefully we can now fix it for the next generations. If so it is worth every second and dollar needed to see it done.

For those who found ways to take advantage of the system unfairly there will likely be little lost. For the rest of us who now have less little more will ever be returned. On that basis only it is a waste of time and money.


After reading all these comments, what happens to the families and farmers that lost their property due to foreclosures and bankruptcies caused by Banking rorts. Will they be compensated ??? Will the Commission accomplish that???


The power and scope of the Commission is limited by law and its terms of reference, it is not all powerful no matter how unpopular the banks and their actions might be.

If the rort is merely unethical or mentioned by the Commission to then get lost in the detail nothing will happen.

If it is illegal or compensable then the victims may have a remedy at law. If it is highly embarrassing and won’t go away the perp might do an ex gratia payment just to try to get rid of the bad publicity. My bet is that the last is the only way some individuals will get anywhere. Banks that decide to publicly repent would much rather buy some reputation back by paying out a few individuals than have to make any more thorough and systematic change. In the end deciding to compensate or not will probably be a commercial decision not a moral one.


How does someone who lost everything pay an attorney fight his case?? Go to legal aid ??? to fight the Bank’s retainer of Attorney’s…???


It depends on how enterprising the victim is. It is possible to get others to fund your suit and it is possible to use the media to your advantage - or both. Sadly unless it is part of one of those strategies I doubt going to the local MP and similar complaints will do much good on its own.

These kind of of problems can be very tough to deal with personally and not everybody has the stamina for it. I think that taking some action on your own behalf is a better bet than falling into despair and waiting on the verandah for a knight in shining armour to happen by. You might say “why do they have to do anything as they are the victim?” Morally you are right but practically this nasty old world isn’t like that. When wronged, taking action, win or lose, may be better for your health and well-being than doing nothing even if there is a cost. I speak from experience.


Like our Farmers…and money given to corrupt Organizations. It’s all been said before, our homeless, companies going bankrupt because increasing gas and electric bills, our derelict and poor, lack of apprentices for our future because of budget cuts, and it goes on and on and on…


They’ll be good. Promise!


Here come reports of intended but intended consequences. Even this gent is not eligible for a loan, apparently because his SALARY is not high enough. Same problem seniors have - eg even if they have substantial assets with 6 figure incomes from dividends and interest, no salaries so no credit cards or loans. Brilliant system steeped in common sense? Not.


Sense? Evidently not. Decency? Evidently not.

The problems they’ve caused and their reaction to the consequences both lead to the conclusion that the characters in charge of our financial industries are not very bright. Bit of a worry that.


Oh but they are… they have made squillions off us all and we’ve let them… maybe it’s us who are not too bright :expressionless:


Who would have guessed?

Apparently not our government based on their pushback and them being dragged and screaming to have the RC.