New banking code should resolve power imbalance issues
The revised Banking Code of Practice has offered some positive initiatives for small business however there are still unresolved issues regarding power imbalance and dispute resolution, according to the Australian Small Business and Family Enterprise Ombudsman, Kate Carnell.
Carnell, who was consulted on a draft version of the code which was provided to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) this week for approval, said that the code would not be enforced by a proposed Banking Code Compliance Committee.
“This means effectively that banks will only act on recommendations if they feel like it,” she said.
“If they don’t think the committee is reasonable they have an escape clause.
“It’s like the umpire is appointed by the home team and they don’t have to accept the umpire’s decision.”
Another concern was that the banks could still “act unilaterally to change the conditions of a loan if there were materially adverse changes”.
The changes could relate to government policy, commodity markets and weather conditions, Carnell said.
“The code says a bank won’t default a loan because of a materially adverse change, but they retain the power to change a loan’s terms and conditions,” she said.
Carnell also criticised the code’s definition of a small business loan as being a total debt facility up to $3 million.
“I want to see the limit raised to $5 million, which would be consistent with the Khoury Review recommendation and the threshold for matters to be heard by the new Australian Financial Complaints Authority,” she said.
AUTHOR
Oksana Patron
Recommended for you
ASIC has released the results of its first adviser exam to be held in 2025, with 241 candidates attempting the test.
Quarterly Wealth Data analysis has uncovered positive improvements in financial adviser numbers compared with losses in the prior corresponding period.
Holding portfolios that are too complex or personalised can be a detractor for acquirers of financial advice firms as they require too much effort to maintain post-acquisition.
As the financial advice profession continues to wait on further DBFO legislation, industry commentators have encouraged advisers to act now in driving practice efficiency.
