Trivialities in ASIC’s regulatory definition of ‘complaint’

Mike Taylor

Managing Editor and Publisher

17 October 2025

Superannuation funds are urging the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) to pursue a more appropriate definition of ‘complaint’ for the purposes of internal dispute resolution (IDR).

They are doing so because they believe the current definition used by ASIC in Regulatory Guide 271 (RG 271) is so wide that it ends up tying up resources to deal with the trivial matters.

The Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia (ASFA) has told pointed out to ASIC that RG 271 Internal dispute resolution adopts this definition of ‘complaint’, as set out in in AS/NZS 10002:2014: “Expression of dissatisfaction made to or about an organization, related to its products, services, staff or the handling of a complaint, where a response or resolution is explicitly or implicitly expected or legally required”.

“This definition contains no element of materiality or harm to the consumer, financial or otherwise,” it said. “It requires RSEs [superannuation funds] to apply their full IDR process to even very trivial and vexatious matters raised by members that have no bearing on the administration or value of their superannuation account and do not point to any failure of service by the RSE.”

“For example, ASFA members have provided examples of ‘complaints’ that are, in truth, simply expressions of preferences or opinions about the tone (not the content) of advertising, or the adoption of a logo/branding tool,” ASFA said.

It said the need to track and report such matters as ‘complaints’ involves the application of resources which ultimately adds to the costs carried by superannuation funds and, therefore, ultimately members.

“It also risks diverting the focus of RSEs, ASIC and AFCA from substantive complaints. In ASFA’s view, there needs to be recognition that while every complaint deserves consideration, a proportionate approach should be adopted, where the seriousness and potential impact of a complaint inform the intensity of response,” it said.

“ASFA considers there would be benefit in ASIC and AFCA working with the superannuation industry to identify potential improvements to the regulatory framework for superannuation complaints.

“This should reinforce the operation of the complaints framework as a mechanism for early identification and remediation of genuine consumer harm, rather than as an administrative endpoint for minor grievances.

“The adoption of a proportionate approach should ensure that consumer protection objectives are achieved without the misallocation of resources to trivial or vexatious matters,” ASFA said.