Super funds defend their right to appeal AFCA decisions
Superannuation funds want to retain a key differentiator between themselves and other financial services entities who are members of the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) – the ability to appeal to the Federal Court.
The superannuation funds have made their position clear in a submission to Treasury responding to proposed legislative changes which they fear have the potential to undercut that key appeal right.
The superannuation funds are effectively wanting to make sure that the rights that they enjoyed under the old Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) regime are not diluted by giving AFCA the ability to hear superannuation complaints within its general (non-superannuation) jurisdiction.
A number of superannuation funds expressed misgivings about superannuation complaints being rolled into the jurisdiction of the AFCA because of the limited rights of appeal when compared to the previous SCT regime.
The submission to Treasury submitted by the Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) described the issue as “critical”.
“It is important to ensure that cases that properly fall within the superannuation jurisdiction are not diverted to the general jurisdiction,” the submission said.
“This is because – as recognised by the Full Court – AFCA’s superannuation jurisdiction provides certain powers, protections and features that are not available through the general jurisdiction which can impact the ultimate outcome of the complaint.
“These include:
- the right to appeal from a Determination made by AFCA to the Federal Court on a matter of law
- the absence of compensation limits
- the powers given to AFCA to join parties to a complaint, obtain relevant information and documents, require attendance at a conciliation conference, and make directions to protect the confidentiality of information, all of which greatly assist the dispute resolution process.
Of course they do. They are getting what they want with vertical integration. They will be exempt from normal advice regulations that proper financial advisers have to deal with. Why should have to comply with AFCA, just like proper financial advisers? That would be fair and provide a level playing field. We can’t possibly have that!!!
Aha, now comes collection time. Those political donations, from dummy entities controlled by ISA, and now achieving returned value from the Labor Party. The industry funds have led the lesson, provided by the big banks over the last decade – give plenty and get back more.
Nothing much! Just a different set of rules for the ISA funds. All those yet to be employed ISA “financial advisers” will, as noted by Wildcat, have a different set of standards, operating under Ms Levy’s QAR
My guess is next cab off the rank will be asking Mr Jones to stop the current annoying facility of allowing retail life insurance in superannuation to be paid by rollovers from the ISA funds. I know of at least three insurers that won’t like that very much at all.
Standby to repel boarders
They’re correct in that they should have the right to appeal, as should financial planners. Of course we won’t end up with an equal system but that’s financial planning in Australia for you.