The superannuation sector will have to argue strongly if it wants to keep the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal (SCT) under its current arrangements, as a Government review of external dispute resolution (EDR) arrangements canvasses housing it within a framework alongside the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) and the Credit and Investments Ombudsman Scheme (CIOS).
The future of the SCT and the degree of oversight by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) has been placed squarely on the table in an issues paper published by the Treasury as part of the Government’s review of EDR arrangements across the financial services industry.
Stakeholders have been given the opportunity to comment on the issues paper which indicated an initial preference for a one-stop-shop approach being opened for consumers and the possibility of all EDR schemes being housed within a single entity.
However, the issues paper also makes clear that there is a clear recognition that the nature of superannuation means that it needs to be treated differently because of its compulsory nature.
The issues paper directly asks stakeholders whether it should it be left for industry to determine the number and form of the financial services ombudsman schemes and whether integration of the existing arrangements is desirable.
It also canvasses the merits and limitations of further integration and whether “a ‘one-stop shop’ [can] most effectively deal with the unique features of the different sectors and products of the financial system (for example, compulsory superannuation)”.
It then asks what form a “one stop shop” take and whether it should take the form of a new single dispute resolution body, or as an ombudsman or statutory tribunal or a combination of both.
The issues paper asks what the jurisdictional limits of such a body should be, how it should be funded, and how it should be oversighted from a regulatory point of view.
