ASIC releases new internal dispute tools ahead of October changes

ASIC has published a set of new tools for financial services providers in anticipation of changes to Internal Dispute Resolution procedures, which are set to take effect on October 5.

The internal reporting documents, which include a data glossary and data dictionary that were first published in pilot form 12 months ago, represent the “next steps in preparedness” for ASIC’s implementation of the new IDR reporting framework, which came out of the Ramsay Review.

The data dictionary sets out the information that financial businesses will need to collect and report to ASIC, while the data glossary provides explanations about key terms.

Both documents have been refined through two rounds of public consultation, ASIC states, and are aligned “as closely as possible” with the reporting approach used by the Australian Financial Complaints Authority, which handles external complaints resolution side.

“Financial firms should now consider how to map their own complaints systems to the data dictionary,” ASIC states, before adding it is aware that “…most financial firms will already be collecting more granular and detailed data about the complaints they receive”.

ASIC originally set out proposed new standards for the IDR in March 2019 (CP 311). After consultation, the corporate regulator then set out the new requirements in Regulatory Guide 271, along with Report 665, which detailed its response to submissions on the initial consultation.

Until the new IDR rules come into effect on October 5, the existing Regulatory Guide (RG 165) will continue to apply to all complaints, ASIC notes.

 

, , , , , ,

Leave a Comment

High-risk AFSLs should pay the highest price, not advisers

High-risk AFSLs should pay the highest price, not advisers

While it’s impossible to eliminate fraud and corporate failures, ASIC must devote more resources to preventing them by closing gaps in the regulatory oversight of the industry. The biggest gap is the monitoring and surveillance of smaller AFSLs and, as such, smaller AFSLs should be contributing more to the ASIC levy, not advisers, writes Neil Macdonald.

Sort content by