An identity theft victim tried to get assistance from the bank where an account was set up in her name but was told they couldn’t help because she wasn’t a customer
The woman’s AFCA complaint against the bank was rejected on the same grounds
On 12 March, after this incident, AFCA gained new powers that allow it investigate any bank involved in a scam or identity theft, whether or not the victim is a customer
When a debit card arrived in the mail in mid-January with Patricia*’s name on it she knew it wasn’t a good sign.
The card was for Great Southern Bank (GSB) – Patricia was not a customer and never had been. She realised her identity must have been stolen.
“I acted quickly to try to limit the damage – placing credit bans, reporting the matter to police, and contacting financial institutions – but I’m very conscious that many people would not detect something like this as quickly,” she says.
Her prompt attention to the matter paid off, because the fraudster had attempted in short order to open accounts under her name with AfterPay, American Express, and Wisr (a personal loan provider). The credit ban Patricia had placed on her file blocked these applications, and all three providers quickly acknowledged that they were fraudulent.
She eventually discovered that her new driver’s licence had been stolen before she received it, and the fraudster had used it to open the GSB account.
But GSB was less than helpful.
During multiple calls with their call centre I received inconsistent information about escalation, was refused access to the fraud team or a supervisor, and was essentially told there was nothing further they could do for me
Identity theft victim Patricia
“When I contacted the bank after discovering the fraudulent account, it was extremely difficult to get support because I was told repeatedly that I was not their customer,” Patricia says.
“Firstly, I wanted to understand how the account had been opened in my name, because that would indicate what personal information had been compromised and what steps I needed to take to protect myself. More broadly, what I was really looking for was acknowledgement and meaningful action from the bank regarding how this happened and how they would prevent it happening again, for myself and others.”
She wanted to know the email address and phone number that were used to open the account in her name. The bank’s reason for refusing to provide this may have been legitimate, but its representatives were also dismissive, unprofessional and rude, Patricia says.
“During multiple calls with their call centre I received inconsistent information about escalation, was refused access to the fraud team or a supervisor, and was essentially told there was nothing further they could do for me.”
As of 12 March, AFCA gained new powers to investigate all banks involved in a scam, whether or not the victim is a customer.
At this point she felt that her only option was to lodge a complaint with the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA). She called out GSB for failing to respond appropriately to her situation and for not having adequate identification checks in place to make sure people opening accounts were who they said they were. The only piece of identification used by the fraudster was her driver’s licence.
But the bank doubled down on its unhelpfulness, appealing to AFCA to have the case dismissed on the grounds that Patricia wasn’t a customer, and that only customers can lodge AFCA complaints. AFCA conceded that this aligned with its legislative charter at the time.
In fairness, GSB is not an outlier when it comes to identity verification. Most banks only require a single primary form of identification to open a bank account, such as a driver’s licence or passport.
A GSB spokesperson tells CHOICE that the bank is prohibited from sharing information about scam perpetrators (including identity theft) with their victims by the both Privacy Act and the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act. The bank says that it responded appropriately to Patricia’s requests for help.
“We have strong sympathy for the affected individual and have worked with her, as well as relevant organisations, to help reduce the risk of further identity theft and fraud,” the spokesperson says.
We believe we escalated the matter appropriately, but acknowledge our communications could have been clearer
Great Southern Bank spokesperson
GSB says it provided sound guidance, advising Patricia to report the incident to the police and place a ban on her credit file. (This good advice aligned with the steps she had already taken.)
But the bank admits that it could have done better.
“We believe we escalated the matter appropriately, but acknowledge our communications could have been clearer, and we are taking steps to improve how we communicate in situations like this.”
Had Patricia’s experience with the scam of identity theft happened in mid-March rather than mid-January, AFCA’s response to her complaint may have been different.
As of 12 March this year, AFCA’s jurisdiction expanded to allow it to investigate scam complaints involving the unauthorised opening of accounts whether or not the complainant is a customer of the bank in question.
It means that when a scammer convinces you to send money from your bank account to an account at a bank set up by the scammer (known as mule accounts), AFCA can open investigations into both banks.
“This is an important step to establishing a broader, more coordinated framework for looking at scam complaints and it reflects how scams operate in the real world,” an AFCA spokesperson says, adding that the change “strengthens transparency and accountability across the banking system by ensuring all parties involved in the movement of scam funds are accountable”.
This is an important step to establishing a broader, more coordinated framework for looking at scam complaints and it reflects how scams operate in the real world
AFCA spokesperson
As for Patricia’s case, AFCA says it “expects banks to engage with identity theft victims based on consumer expectations and good industry practice”.
Along with the AFCA complaint, Patricia also complained to GSB’s Customer Advocacy team.
“I decided to reach out in a more direct and personal way to set out the full context of what had happened and to see whether there would be any acknowledgement, accountability or rationale around the bank’s role in the situation. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the case,” Patricia says.
The bank maintained that it had made no mistakes since the fraudulent account was opened using a valid driver’s licence.
Andy Kollmorgen is the Investigations Editor at CHOICE. He reports on a wide range of issues in the consumer marketplace, with a focus on financial harm to vulnerable people at the hands of corporations and businesses. Prior to CHOICE, Andy worked at the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and at the Australian Financial Review along with a number of other news organisations. Andy is a former member of the NSW Fair Trading Advisory Council. He has a Bachelor of Arts in English from New York University. LinkedIn
Andy Kollmorgen is the Investigations Editor at CHOICE. He reports on a wide range of issues in the consumer marketplace, with a focus on financial harm to vulnerable people at the hands of corporations and businesses. Prior to CHOICE, Andy worked at the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and at the Australian Financial Review along with a number of other news organisations. Andy is a former member of the NSW Fair Trading Advisory Council. He has a Bachelor of Arts in English from New York University. LinkedIn
For more than 60 years, we've been making a difference for Australian consumers. In that time, we've never taken ads or sponsorship.
Instead we're funded by members who value expert reviews and independent product testing.
With no self-interest behind our advice, you don't just buy smarter, you get the answers that you need.
You know without hesitation what's safe for you and your family. And our recent sunscreens test showed just how important it is to keep business claims in check.
So you'll never be alone when something goes wrong or a business treats you unfairly.
