Australia's Central Bank should have regulated most of the nine changes pronounced in the ABA's 'Banking Code of Practice (effective by 1 July 2019) at least 15 years earlier

Australia's Principal Regulator of the Payments System breached its Statutory Duty to "best contribute to.......... the economic prosperity and welfare of (ALL) the people of Australia".  Its Payments Systems Board abrogated its responsibility to always Act in the Public Interest by failing to "..undertake more direct regulation of ‘designated’ payments systems when it judges it to be in the public interest" due to condoning Two Exceedingly Costly Monthly Interest Charging Practices by many Credit Card Issuers that Targeted Credit Cardholders With Low Financial Literacy Capacity, whereupon Financially Uneducated And Vulnerable Australians have suffered Extreme Financial And Emotional Distress. 

Two Exceedingly Costly Monthly Interest Charging Practices evidences that the Reserve Bank breached its Statutory Duty and Fiduciary Duty to Credit Cardholders with poor Financial Literacy Capacity.  Persistent Revolvers that account for a mere 12.58% circa of Credit Cardholders contribute a whopping 80% circa of all Interest And Penalty Fees Revenue annually generated from Credit Card Products.  The numeric dollar magnitude of those losses is explained in the Writer's Submission to Maurice Blackburn lawyers.

RBA's LOAN RATE STICKINESS: THEORY AND EVIDENCE written by Philip Lowe and Thomas Rohling - Research Discussion Paper - 9206 - June 1992 recognised that Credit Card Issuers were not passing on reductions in the cost of funds, but the RBA Board did zilch about the Commonwealth Govt. regulating Credit Card Issuers to lower interest rates on their Credit Card Products, yet it possessed the Extensive Regulatory Powers to do so.  Below is an extract from RBA's LOAN RATE STICKINESS: THEORY AND EVIDENCE:

"4. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

This paper examines the degree of price stickiness in the market for bank loans. In the classical world of perfect competition, changes in marginal costs are translated into similar changes in the price of the product. We find that complete pass-through of changes in banks' marginal cost of funds only occurs with the base or reference overdraft rates to large and small business borrowers. For credit cards, personal loans, owner-occupied housing loans and the standard overdraft rate, changes in the banks' marginal cost of funds have not been translated one for one into the contemporaneous lending rates."

Unconscionable Credit Card Interest Charging focuses on a significant change in interest charging for Credit Cards that a Red Faced Australian Bankers Association, under a parachuted in, Anna Bligh, regulated ALL Credit Card Issuers in Aust. implement by 1 July 2019 under the ABA's 'Banking Code of Practice'. These regulated changes followed years of deceit perpetrated voracity fostered under Ms. Bligh's two predecessors, David Bell and Steven Münchenberg.  Below is a critical extract from Unconscionable Credit Card Interest Charging:

"ABC News article, Banks revamp code of practice in face of scandals, royal commission -

(A).      informed that the current CEO of the ABA, Anna Bligh, announced in late Dec 2017 that the ABA had just lodged a 'Banking Code of Practice' with the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) for approval; and

(B).      listed several changes that will be legally binding on all 'member banks' of the ABA which includes:

                 "Customers only paying interest on what remains on a credit card and not the full amount of purchase if a loan is being paid down."

The fact that the ABA made it mandatory in its lodged Banking Code of Practice that its members charge interest on ONLY any unpaid portion of the Closing Balance after the Payment Due Date is patent evidence that the previous long-running practice (explained in Unconscionable Credit Card Interest Charging) was Unconscionable Conduct  Targeted At Credit Cardholders With Low Financial Literacy Capacity." 

 

 

[bottom.htm]