Biggest rip offs in business?

[The Triangle]

well all the millions employed by these multinationals pay income tax on their salaries and the multinationals pay payroll taxes on those salaries too.

 

[basilio]

well all the millions employed by these multinationals pay income tax on their salaries and the multinationals pay payroll taxes on those salaries too.

Indeed Triangle. This is well used argument. I believe it first surfaced in the 1700's in France. In those days the Church and Nobility weren't taxed. They argued along similar lines that they employed so many people who all paid tax and so they were responsible for this taxation.

I believe it came back again in England in the 1800's . The landed gentry made similar claims of the thousands of people they employed who again were able to pay tax because of the generosity of their employers.

 

[basilio]

This story is well worth checking out. It highlights the scandalous behaviour of the Commonwealth Bank in their dealings with customers funds. When this story was exposed by a CBA whistle blower CBA turned their attention to destroying the credibility of the whistle blower and then the credibility of the journalist who exposed them.

Powerful and confronting story of abuse of power. Well worth reading in full. Be interesting to see if the CBA decides to sue for libel.

Be also interesting to see the response in the media and CBA to the story.

The article is not an accident. On Monday another whistle blower is going on trial for ...whistle blowing. Adele Ferguson is highlighting how important it is to listen to these people and take the strongest action to bring the perpetrators to task not those who turn the public spotlight on scams.

The inside account of how Commonwealth Bank tried to bury the scandal that sparked a royal commission​

Background Briefing
/
The Whistleblowers by Adele Ferguson with Mario Christodoulou
Posted 9h ago9 hours ago, updated 1h ago1 hours ago

Adele Ferguson and Jeff Morris stand outside a CBA branch in Sydney.(Background Briefing: Mridula Amin)
Help keep family & friends informed by sharing this article

Link copied
It was one of the strangest phone calls I've ever received. A public relations officer for a big legal firm was on the other end of the line, asking if I'd been ringing some of their clients.

I hadn't.

But somebody had, and they'd been impersonating me.

It was one of many dirty tricks that was used over a period of more than four and a half years while I reported on one of the biggest financial scandals Australia has ever seen.

Smear campaigns, intimidation, threats, fake identities and surveillance. This is not how you would expect blue chip companies to behave when their reputations are threatened.

But all these tactics were employed by the Commonwealth Bank to shut down a scandal that exposed forgery, fraud and a cover up that culminated in a royal commission into the entire financial services industry.

The victims were the CBA's customers; some were retirees, others young people with home ownership dreams. The bank had promised to invest their money in suitable products but when the financial market tanked — they watched in horror as their money evaporated.

If the bank couldn't squash the unfolding scandal, it would put at risk the business model, billions of dollars in revenue, reputations and careers.

No one was off limits: industry insiders, former customers and journalists, including me.

But all the money and mudslinging proved no match for whistleblowers, who when they saw wrongdoing, refused to stay silent.

CBA accused staff of being mentally unstable in bid to quash a financial services scandal

The inside story of how the Commonwealth Bank went to extraordinary lengths to discredit whistleblowers and journalists who exposed wrongdoing within the company.

www.abc.net.au

 

[SirRumpole]

This story is well worth checking out. It highlights the scandalous behaviour of the Commonwealth Bank in their dealings with customers funds. When this story was exposed by a CBA whistle blower CBA turned their attention to destroying the credibility of the whistle blower and then the credibility of the journalist who exposed them.

Powerful and confronting story of abuse of power. Well worth reading in full. Be interesting to see if the CBA decides to sue for libel.

Be also interesting to see the response in the media and CBA to the story.

The article is not an accident. On Monday another whistle blower is going on trial for ...whistle blowing. Adele Ferguson is highlighting how important it is to listen to these people and take the strongest action to bring the perpetrators to task not those who turn the public spotlight on scams.

The inside account of how Commonwealth Bank tried to bury the scandal that sparked a royal commission​

Background Briefing
/
The Whistleblowers by Adele Ferguson with Mario Christodoulou
Posted 9h ago9 hours ago, updated 1h ago1 hours ago
View attachment 165582
Adele Ferguson and Jeff Morris stand outside a CBA branch in Sydney.(Background Briefing: Mridula Amin)
Help keep family & friends informed by sharing this article

Link copied
It was one of the strangest phone calls I've ever received. A public relations officer for a big legal firm was on the other end of the line, asking if I'd been ringing some of their clients.

I hadn't.

But somebody had, and they'd been impersonating me.

It was one of many dirty tricks that was used over a period of more than four and a half years while I reported on one of the biggest financial scandals Australia has ever seen.

Smear campaigns, intimidation, threats, fake identities and surveillance. This is not how you would expect blue chip companies to behave when their reputations are threatened.

But all these tactics were employed by the Commonwealth Bank to shut down a scandal that exposed forgery, fraud and a cover up that culminated in a royal commission into the entire financial services industry.

The victims were the CBA's customers; some were retirees, others young people with home ownership dreams. The bank had promised to invest their money in suitable products but when the financial market tanked — they watched in horror as their money evaporated.

If the bank couldn't squash the unfolding scandal, it would put at risk the business model, billions of dollars in revenue, reputations and careers.

No one was off limits: industry insiders, former customers and journalists, including me.

But all the money and mudslinging proved no match for whistleblowers, who when they saw wrongdoing, refused to stay silent.

CBA accused staff of being mentally unstable in bid to quash a financial services scandal

The inside story of how the Commonwealth Bank went to extraordinary lengths to discredit whistleblowers and journalists who exposed wrongdoing within the company.

www.abc.net.au

All the people who made the intimidatory/threatening/fake news calls should be identified and sacked.

 

[basilio]

How badly can a business treat it's customers ? How Low could They Go ?
I don't think one could make up this xhite .
I have quoted just the winner. But my god I don't know how the rest of the miserable, thieving lot didn't get equal footing.

And the winners of the 2023 awards for worst customer service are …​

We celebrate the companies that went the extra mile … to inflate their balance sheets and let down loyal customers

Exemplary corporate logic​

And the winner is … Barclays (mission statement: “Building a stronger and more inclusive economy that’s better for everyone”).

The deceased can’t argue, so if a customer persists, kill them off. This absolved the bank from engaging with a 91-year-old widow who wanted to remove her late husband’s name from their joint account. Her account was frozen, payments were stopped, phone line and energy supply cut off, and, when she took two buses to the nearest surviving branch to remonstrate, she was told she was dead.

And the winners of the 2023 awards for worst customer service are …

We celebrate the companies that went the extra mile … to inflate their balance sheets and let down loyal customers

www.theguardian.com

 

[Belli]

This is behind a paywall.

After my mum’s death, I couldn’t believe what the bank did to my 93-year-old dad

Calling the banks bastards is a tired cliche, until you witness their bastardry up close.

www.smh.com.au

Synopsis is the writer's Mum died and her 93 year-old Dad, after informing the bank of this, was locked out of the joint account. His local branch had closed and the closest bank is 38 km away. He needed transport to even get to the station in order to travel that distance.

In my case, I did go to the bank and the front of desk was gracious, noted the account was one either could operate and simply removed my wife's name from being active on the account. It was seamless and took less than 15 minutes.

It appears to me the bank's systems may have changed and the staff can only tick various boxes or cannot be bothered in being flexible thereby according the bank the title of being absolute p***ks.

 

[Knobby22]

This is behind a paywall.

After my mum’s death, I couldn’t believe what the bank did to my 93-year-old dad

Calling the banks bastards is a tired cliche, until you witness their bastardry up close.

www.smh.com.au

Synopsis is the writer's Mum died and her 93 year-old Dad, after informing the bank of this, was locked out of the joint account. His local branch had closed and the closest bank is 38 km away. He needed transport to even get to the station in order to travel that distance.

In my case, I did go to the bank and the front of desk was gracious, noted the account was one either could operate and simply removed my wife's name from being active on the account. It was seamless and took less than 15 minutes.

It appears to me the bank's systems may have changed and the staff can only tick various boxes or cannot be bothered in being flexible thereby according the bank the title of being absolute p***ks.

I did read that article recently and it reminded me what happened to my Mum about 7 years ago. She is not wealthy and collects a pension. We, her children ( 5 off) help her also.

She went to Westpac in a country town to close Dad's account as he had died a month earlier with a sum of only $800 and the manager was quite rude and accusatory and Mum still in grieving was quite upset. She was in tears.

He later rang and apologised, which was nice but you think they would have better procedures when someone is widowed.

 

[Belli]

I did read that article recently and it reminded me what happened to my Mum about 7 years ago. She is not wealthy and collects a pension. We, her children ( 5 off) help her also.

She went to Westpac in a country town to close Dad's account as he had died a month earlier with a sum of only $800 and the manager was quite rude and accusatory and Mum still in grieving was quite upset. She was in tears.

He later rang and apologised, which was nice but you think they would have better procedures when someone is widowed.

Most definitely not a good experience for your Mum @Knobby22. Sorry it happened.

I consider as this society moves towards digital transactions and communications it will not be a pleasant situation for some, including if dealing with superannuation funds.

As superannuation funds get larger so does the administration side of things. It's an inevitable consequence I think. When relatives start to deal with death benefits (bloody strange term if you ask me. Death has a benefit?) and people are then needing to deal with a Trust structure and all that entails, they are going to get picky to ensure the money is paid out according to the legislation. They have no wish to be sued if it's stuffed up. It's already happened despite a valid BDBN being in place. I fear the problem may increase but I do hope I am wrong.

 

[basilio]

This is behind a paywall.

After my mum’s death, I couldn’t believe what the bank did to my 93-year-old dad

Calling the banks bastards is a tired cliche, until you witness their bastardry up close.

www.smh.com.au

Synopsis is the writer's Mum died and her 93 year-old Dad, after informing the bank of this, was locked out of the joint account. His local branch had closed and the closest bank is 38 km away. He needed transport to even get to the station in order to travel that distance.

In my case, I did go to the bank and the front of desk was gracious, noted the account was one either could operate and simply removed my wife's name from being active on the account. It was seamless and took less than 15 minutes.

It appears to me the bank's systems may have changed and the staff can only tick various boxes or cannot be bothered in being flexible thereby according the bank the title of being absolute p***ks.

That is the deal. Great outcome.
So OK the computer systems may have a glitch or whatever. But refusing to deal with people because the computer says they are dead or not swiftly sorting out the seemingly inevitable problems with joint accounts that come when a loved one dies is in my mind commercially criminal. The businesses should be publicly bollocked. Just not good enough.

 

[Ferret]

refusing to deal with people because the computer says they are dead or not swiftly sorting out the seemingly inevitable problems with joint accounts that come when a loved one dies is in my mind commercially criminal. The businesses should be publicly bollocked. Just not good enough.

I wonder how much of this is unforeseen consequences of the banking royal commission?

Perhaps following their caning during the BRC, banks are so stringently following procedures and the letter of the law that we end up with these situations.

 

[basilio]

I wonder how much of this is unforeseen consequences of the banking royal commission?

Perhaps following their caning during the BRC, banks are so stringently following procedures and the letter of the law that we end up with these situations.

I don't think so Ferret. That doesn't really make sense.

The well deserved caning the banks got was for a host of awful behaviours including charging dead people for services and essentially acting against the interests of their customers. In fact they were disregarding proper procedures.

Sorting out situations where living people are not recognised because the computer says they are dead is simply common sense and good business practice. Similarly ensuring that partners of people who have died can still access joint bank accounts ect falls under the same guidelines.

Falling back on the excuse of "policies or procedures" as an excuse to not address glaring mistakes should be acceptable practice. In fact good business practice would use these incidents as pointers to changing policies and procedures to ensure such events don't reoccur.

Key points and recommendations of the banking royal commission report

Banks face prosecutions over misconduct and ‘conflicted’ pay systems to be banned as regulators put on notice to fix the industry or face the axe

www.theguardian.com