Case notes published by the Privacy Commissioner this year give examples of the types of complaints made relating to financial services:

In G v Financial Institutions X and Y [2008] PrivCmrA 7 the complaint related to the disclosure of a person’s information under significant cash transaction reports to AUSTRAC. Although 1 of the financial institutions made an error in respect of the person’s occupation (which it corrected) the OFPC decided that both organisations were required by law to make such disclosures and could rely on the exception in National Privacy Principle 2.1(g).

In R v Finance Company [2008] PrivCmrA 18 the complainant alleged that the finance company as a credit provider listed a payment default on the complainant’s credit information file held by a credit reporting agency without sending prior written notice advising the complainant their account was overdue. As the finance company was able to provide evidence to indicate that the listing was made on the complainant’s credit information file in accordance with section 18E(1) of the Privacy Act, the Commissioner declined to investigate the matter under section 41(1)(a) of the Privacy Act.

The Financial Services Authority UK (FSA) has fined GE Money Home Lending £1.12 million for systems and controls failings that resulted in GE Money not complying with the loan agreement, resulting in 684 borrowers suffering a total financial loss in excess of £2.3 million.

The customers affected were those whose loan contracts were subject to a "retention" clause whereby a sum of around £3,000 was withheld from the mortgage advance as a condition of the  loan – typically where the borrower was required to carry out specified repairs to the mortgaged property. GE Money’s loan terms and conditions provided that these retention monies would be retained for six months and that during this time the borrower would be charged interest on the full mortgage loan including the retention monies. After six months the retention monies and accumulated interest should have been released to the borrower or applied to reduce the outstanding mortgage loan.

The firm’s terms and conditions did not make it clear to all customers that they would be charged interest on the full mortgage loan, including the retention monies, during the six month retention period.

Due to inadequate systems and procedures at GE Money, retention monies and accumulated interest were not always paid to borrowers or applied to their outstanding mortgage loan after six months and GE Money continued to charge some borrowers interest on retention monies beyond the six month retention period. When a mortgage with an outstanding retention was redeemed, GE money did not always deduct the retention monies and accumulated interest from the outstanding mortgage loan. This resulted in some borrowers overpaying GE Money when redeeming their mortgage.