Digital Takeovers, Transactions May Harm Consumers: ACCC

Takeovers of smaller rivals by digital platforms, including their data sets, may pose a threat to consumers’ choice and privacy, said ACCC Chair Rod Sims.

Mr Sims was speaking at the Consumer Policy Research Conference (CPRC) Conference on the ACCC’s perspectives on consumer welfare in the data economy.

“Few consumers are fully informed of, nor can they effectively control, how their data is going to be used and shared. There are further concerns when the service they sign up to is taken over by another business,” said Mr Sims.

Mr Sims raised these issues in relation to Google’s recently announced proposed acquisition of Fitbit.

“The change in data collection policies, when a company like Fitbit transfers its data to Google, creates a very uncertain world for consumers who shared very personal information about their health to Fitbit under a certain set of privacy terms,” said Mr Sims.

At the time of Google’s acquisition of DoubleClick, DoubleClick reportedly denied that the data it collects through its system for serving ads would be combined with Google’s search data.  Eight years later, Google updated its privacy policy and removed a commitment not to combine Doubleclick data with personally identifiable data held by Google.

When Facebook acquired WhatsApp, Facebook claimed it was unable to establish reliable matching between Facebook users and WhatsApp users’ accounts. Two years later, WhatsApp updated its terms of service and privacy policy, indicating it could link WhatsApp users’ phone numbers with Facebook users’ identities.

“Given the history of digital platforms making statements as to what they intend to do with data and what they actually do down the track, it is a stretch to believe any commitment Google makes in relation Fitbit users’ data will still be in place five years from now.”

“Clearly, personal health data is an increasingly valuable commodity so it is important when consumers sign up to a particular health platform their original privacy choices are respected and their personal data is protected even if that company is sold.”

Research from the ACCC inquiry showed around 80 per cent of users considered digital platforms tracking their online behaviour to create profiles, and also the sharing their personal information with an unknown third party, is a misuse of their information.

Facebook’s recent announcement of its planned offering of a cryptocurrency Libra is also a potential cause for concern, said Mr Sims.

“Here we have an organisation, whose lifeblood is to monetise data, getting into the financial services industry,” said Mr Sims.

“A lack of clear information about how their data will be handled reduces consumers’ ability to make informed choices based on that data.”

“During our DPI we found a lack of consumer protection and effective deterrence of poor data practises have undermined consumer’s ability to choose products.”

“Vague, long and complex data policies contribute to this substantial disconnect between how consumers think their data should be treated and how it is actually treated,” said Mr Sims.

“Transparency and inadequate disclosure issues involving digital platforms and consumer data were a major focus of our Inquiry, and remain one of the ACCC’s top priorities.” 

Industry responds to ACCC inquiry into home lending

Yesterday, the government announced the ACCC will be conducting an inquiry into home loan pricing, investigating how lenders set their rates, why they often fail to pass through RBA rate cuts to borrowers in full, and the barriers that may be preventing consumers from switching to cheaper options on the market. Via AustralianBroker.

Over the course of the day, key industry players publicly responded to the news, some welcoming the development, while the major banks seemed to imply the key concerns listed were a matter of miscommunication rather than misbehaviour. 

FBAA

The Finance Brokers Association of Australia (FBAA) welcomed the announcement of an inquiry, with managing director Peter White dubbing the examination of the banking sector “appropriate.”

“I’ve been calling on the banks for a long time to pass on interest rate cuts in full,” White said.

“The banks have been playing some sort of seesaw game where they will pass on a little bit this time and then a bit more – or a bit less – the next time.

“There’s a pattern of behaviour here that Australians are clearly not happy with.”

White rejected the banks’ claims the partial rate pass throughs have been due to increasing costs.

“The banks are being hit with penalties for breaches uncovered through the royal commission, and through investigations by the Banking Executive Accountability Regime (BEAR).

“Trying to balance the books by passing on these penalties is not something that should be borne by borrowers.

 “This inquiry provides an opportunity for banks to be transparent around their decision making and how they balance the needs of the community.”

COBA

The Customer Owned Banking Association (COBA) also welcomed news of the inquiry, particularly singling out the investigation into what prevents more consumers from switching banks when they may find a better deal elsewhere.

Further, the association expressed optimism the inquiry with generate “creative new ways to unleash consumer power.”

“Empowering consumers to switch their banking and to shop around is an unambiguously good thing,” said COBA director of strategy Sally Mackenzie.

“A more competitive market will make all players care more about their customers, and the market will function more effectively if there is more intense competition for borrowers.

According to Mackenzie, it’s up to the policymakers to enable consumers to drive this market-wide competition.

ANZ

In its response, ANZ asserted the issues raised in the ACCC inquiry launch stem from a shared misperception held among consumers. 

“Despite intense competition, there is cynicism in the broader community about interest rates for home loans,” said ANZ CEO Shayne Elliott.

“We know we have not done a good job in explaining our position and we will be working hard to ensure this process delivers results. 

“The inquiry is a good opportunity to provide facts in what is a complex space and we hope it will provide the public with renewed confidence in the way their home loans are priced.”

Westpac

Westpac took a similar stance to ANZ, but went yet further, directly defending its prioritisation of protecting its margins and making a reasonable profit. 

“The inquiry is an important opportunity to put the facts on the table around mortgage pricing,” said Westpac Group CEO Brian Hartzer. 

“Pricing decisions require banks to take into account a number of factors, particularly as the cash rate heads towards zero. In particular we have to manage the net interest margin – that is the difference between deposit and lending rates. As part of this process we take into account the interest of borrowers, depositors and shareholders who provide the equity that enables us to operate.

“Banks also need to make a reasonable level of return. This not only supports shareholder investment it also underpins prudential stability, and our debt rating. The level of profit also needs to be considered in relation to the size of our balance sheet which is $850bn. In fact our profitability in terms of ROE has more than halved over the last 15 years.

“Westpac must also retain its double AA rating. This rating allows the bank to import funding at more reasonable cost from international investors. To lose it would increase the cost of our wholesale funding which would inevitably lead to higher interest rates for our borrowers.”

 NAB

NAB acknowledged the launch, but did so in a noncommittal manner.

Chief customer officer for consumer banking, Mike Baird said, “This is an important opportunity to discuss the challenges of an increasingly low interest rate environment and engage in a broader discussion about how we support all our customers – both depositors and borrowers.”

The commentary did not extend further, aside from a list of “fast facts” tagged onto the end, including that NAB currently has the lowest Standard Variable Rate of the majors, has gotten rid of over 100 fees from its products and services, and offers a special fixed rate of 2.88% for two years for first home owners – seeming to imply the bank has already done a great deal in making itself more hospitable for customers.

ACCC Tasked (Again) To Look At Mortgage Pricing

Yet another inquiry has been announced into mortgage pricing as the ACCC is tasked to examine the banks failure to pass on in full official interest rate cuts engineered by the central bank. The ACCC’s preliminary report is due by 30 March next year, six months before the final report.

Beyond the crocodile tears, there are important questions here, because as we have highlighted, loyalty is not rewarded as the banks cut rates to attract new customers. In addition, deposit margin compression has reach a floor, and funding costs are under pressure. But nothing has fundamentally changed from recent ACCC and Productivity Commission reports. Yet, having another investigation takes pressure off The Treasurer, conveniently.

Via The Guardian. The treasurer, Josh Frydenberg, has asked the competition watchdog to examine why many mortgage holders are being charged rates well above the cash rate record low of 0.75%.

The higher rates have prompted allegations of price gouging by the banks – Commonwealth Bank, Westpac, ANZ and National Australia Bank – which have previously cited funding costs as a reason why not all reductions could be passed on.

“We need information about the cost of the funds of the banks and … why they’re not passing on these rate cuts in full,” Frydenberg told ABC television on Monday.

The inquiry, which will also include smaller institutions, comes after an earlier royal commission into misconduct in the banking sector uncovered predatory practices and dented market confidence.

But Frydenberg shrugged off suggestions that the new inquiry by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission would further affect confidence in Australia’s banks.

“I actually did call the CEOs of the big four banks yesterday and told them that this could actually help clear the air,” he said. “But at the same time, you know, they’re defending their patch and will continue to do.”

The treasurer said the banks need to explain how they balance the competing needs of shareholders and customers.

The official cash rate is at a record low of 0.75% after the Reserve Bank of Australia cut interest rates three times this year. But the big four banks on average passed on only 75% of the total reductions to their customers.

“There are a number of smaller lenders that have actually wasted no time in passing on these rate cuts on in full,” Frydenberg said.

“If the big four banks had passed on these 75 basis point rate cuts, then somebody with a $400,000 mortgage would be more than $500 a year better off in lower interest payments.”

The ACCC’s preliminary report is due by 30 March next year, six months before the final report.

Changes to Banking Code should be strengthened: ACCC

The ACCC proposes to impose conditions on the Australian Banking Association’s (ABA) Banking Code of Practice to ensure the revised Code will benefit low-income consumers and drought-affected farmers.

The ABA, on behalf of its 23 members including the major banks, has sought authorisation to amend its Banking Code in line with recommendations of the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry (Hayne Royal Commission).

The proposed amendments aim to improve basic bank accounts and low or no-fee accounts by prohibiting informal overdrafts unless requested by the customer, and dishonour fees. The ABA is also proposing that certain types of basic bank accounts have no minimum deposits, free direct debit facilities, access to a debit card at no extra cost and free unlimited domestic transactions.

In addition, the ABA’s changes would prevent default interest being charged on agricultural loans in drought-affected areas.

After considering the ABA’s proposal, the ACCC believes that additional conditions are required to strengthen these changes.

“The proposed changes to the Code should result in public benefits, by giving customers on low incomes better access to affordable banking, and to address a source of significant harm to farmers experiencing drought,” ACCC Deputy Chair Delia Rickard said.

“While the ACCC strongly supports these objectives, we are proposing to place extra conditions on ABA members to ensure the changes effectively address the Royal Commission’s recommendations, and in turn actually deliver these public benefits.”

For example, under the ABA’s proposal, basic bank accounts could still be overdrawn without the customer’s agreement in some circumstances, and banks could continue to charge interest, in some cases at rates approaching 20 per cent, on overdrawn amounts.

“This could lead to low income customers getting into debt from overdrafts they did not agree to, which is exactly the kind of problem the Hayne Royal Commission sought to address,” Ms Rickard said.

The proposed conditions of authorisation would not allow interest to be charged in these cases, or would require any such interest charges to be repaid to the customer.

The ACCC also shares consumer groups’ concerns that the ABA’s proposed changes would not require banks to proactively identify existing customers who would be eligible for the accounts, or even to continue to offer a basic bank account at all.

To address this, the ACCC’s proposed conditions would require banks to proactively identify eligible customers, including through data analysis; inform these customers of their eligibility, and for the ABA to report to the ACCC on measures taken to offer them fee-free bank accounts, and report how many customers have taken them up.

The ACCC will also require members of the ABA who currently offer a basic banking product to continue to do so for the period of authorisation.

Feedback is invited on these issues and the proposed conditions by 14 October 2019. The ACCC’s final determination is due in November 2019.

The draft determination and more information about the application for authorisation is available at The Australian Banking Association.

Customer owned banking sector welcomes reports of the ACCC’s request for banking competition inquiry

Australia’s customer owned banking sector welcomes reports that the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is requesting to conduct an inquiry into the banking industry’s competitiveness.

Customer Owned Banking Association CEO Michael Lawrence says the request from the ACCC and the comments from Tim Wilson MP were encouraging for credit unions, building societies and mutual banks who have been leading the charge for a more competitive retail banking market.

“The enduring solution to concerns about the banking market is action to promote competition.

“We don’t have sustainable banking competition at the moment. A lack of competition can contribute to inappropriate conduct by firms, and insufficient choice, limited access and poor-quality products for consumers.

 “We strongly support the ACCC’s calls for an inquiry to examine the banking industry’s competitiveness. It’s encouraging to see that the ACCC and Tim Wilson MP share our sector’s concerns about competition and what an uncompetitive banking market means for consumers.

“Last year’s Productivity Commission’s report on competition in banking sent strong messages to regulators and policymakers that regulation is hurting competition and consumers are paying the price.

“The regulatory framework over time has entrenched the dominant position of the largest banks.

“The PC report shone a light on a problem that is not well enough recognised – that more and more regulation can be harmful to consumers because it weakens competition.

“The Productivity Commission found that competition drives innovation and overall value for customers.  “The Financial Services Royal Commission looked into misconduct, now is the time to look into competition.”

International Money Transfers – Yet Another Big Bank Rip-Off! [Podcast]

We look at the latest ACCC report.

https://www.accc.gov.au/publications/foreign-currency-conversion-services-inquiry-final-report

Digital Finance Analytics (DFA) Blog
Digital Finance Analytics (DFA) Blog
International Money Transfers - Yet Another Big Bank Rip-Off! [Podcast]
Loading
/

Australians paying millions too much for foreign currency services

Australian consumers are paying too much for foreign currency conversion (FX) services because of confusing pricing and a lack of robust competition, a new ACCC report has found.

The final report of the ACCC’s Foreign Currency Conversion Services Inquiry highlights important competition and consumer issues affecting individuals and small businesses who use international money transfers (IMTs), foreign cash, travel cards, and credit cards or debit cards for transactions in foreign currencies.

The ACCC found that it can be challenging for consumers to shop around and make informed decisions about FX services. As a result, many consumers continue to use the big four banks for FX services despite the availability of much cheaper alternatives.

It is difficult for consumers to compare prices because some suppliers do not disclose their total price up front. In addition, consumers pay unexpected fees for some services. Finally, complex prices can deter consumers from shopping around because of the time and effort required to do so.

During 2017-18, individual consumers who used the big four banks to send IMTs in US dollars and British pounds could have collectively saved about AUD150 million if they had instead used a lower priced IMT supplier.

“Shopping around could save Australian consumers hundreds of millions of dollars each year,” ACCC Chair Rod Sims said.

“Consumers and small businesses tend to default to their usual bank to send money overseas, but this may not be the cheapest option. This is another example where consumers may end up paying more for their loyalty.”

Guidance for consumers using FX services

The ACCC has released a guide to help consumers shop around. For example, the guide gives tips on sending money overseas and avoiding fees when making overseas purchases online.

“The guide will help consumers to shop around, carefully select where and how they pay for their purchases and to identify fees so they can get the best deal,” Mr Sims said.

“For example, the guide explains how foreign exchange services with low or no fees are not always the best value for money.”

“We have also tried to clear up a few misconceptions, such as the assumption that paying in Australian dollars when shopping overseas is always best, when that is not the case.”

The final report warns that travellers can pay a high price for leaving their purchase of foreign cash to the last minute and buying at the airport.

Consumers should also consider whether their existing credit or debit card may be cheaper than using foreign cash or a travel money card for overseas purchases. Some credit and debit providers offer cards with no international transaction fees which can be a much cheaper option than many other products.

Consumers should be aware that some commercial comparison sites may not be independent and that suppliers may pay for their services to be promoted by these sites. There are, however, two government-funded comparison websites for international money transfers (IMTs): www.sendmoneypacific.org and www.saverasia.com, which compare prices of IMT services available to a number of South-East Asian and Pacific Island countries.

Savings to be made

The ACCC inquiry found:

  • Foreign cash is more expensive at airport locations than at other locations. When buying USD200 in February 2019, consumers could have saved AUD40 by purchasing from the cheapest supplier at a non-airport location, compared with the most expensive supplier at the airport.
     
  • Consumers and small businesses who used the most expensive bank to transfer USD7000 would have paid more than AUD500 more than if they had used the cheapest supplier.
     
  • If customers of the big four banks used a debit or credit card without international transaction fees instead of a travel money card, they could save up to AUD13 on a USD200 purchase.
     
  • Customers of the big four banks could save up to AUD5 on a USD200 purchase if they used a ‘regular’ debit or credit card instead of a travel money card.

Guidance for businesses

The report includes best practice guidance for businesses supplying FX services. It explains how they should disclose prices to consumers. The guidance focuses on ensuring that businesses clearly disclose the full price of an FX service to consumers upfront.

“We consider businesses who ignore this best practice guidance may be at risk of breaching the Australian Consumer Law,” Mr Sims said.

“The ACCC will take action against businesses who do not make appropriate disclosures to consumers.”

New entrants providing lower prices, more advanced services

The ACCC has found that recent competition from newer entrants is delivering better outcomes for consumers making use of IMTs, including through lower prices and more advanced services.

These new entrants often rely on obtaining services from banks, their vertically integrated competitors, to provide IMTs to their customers. However, the inquiry found that some non-bank IMT suppliers had been denied access to bank services, such as bank accounts.

“Banks need to comply with Australia’s anti-money laundering and counter terrorism financing laws, and this is one reason banks have given for withdrawing banking services to IMT providers,” Mr Sims said.

“The withdrawal of banking services from non-bank IMT suppliers represents a significant threat to competition that could ultimately result in less choice and higher prices for consumers.”

To address this issue, the ACCC recommends development of a scheme to facilitate continued and efficient access to banking services by non-bank IMT suppliers. This would include addressing the due diligence requirements of the banks, including in relation to anti-money laundering and counterterrorism financing requirements.

This scheme should be operational by the end of 2020.

Background

The inquiry was preceded by:

  • findings by the World Bank in June 2018 that the cost of sending money overseas from Australia was approximately 11 per cent higher than the G20 average, 13 per cent higher than the UK and almost 40 per cent higher than the US
     
  • the Productivity Commission’s Report on Competition in the Australian Financial System which recommended that the ACCC, in consultation with ASIC, investigate what additional disclosure methods could be used to improve consumer understanding and comparison of fees for foreign transactions.

On 2 October 2018, the Treasurer approved the ACCC holding an inquiry into the supply of FX services in Australia. On the same day, the ACCC released an issues paper for the inquiry. In response, the ACCC received 63 written submissions from a mix of consumers, FX services suppliers, small businesses and other stakeholders.

The final report focuses its competition analysis primarily on IMTs. IMTs are significant for a number of reasons including:

  • prices in Australia are high by global standards and IMTs are a significant outlay for Australians with an estimated AUD21 billion in personal IMTs sent from Australia each year
     
  • IMTs are regularly used by groups of potentially vulnerable and disadvantaged consumers such as migrants and temporary workers
     
  • the average transaction size for IMTs is much larger than the other services considered in the inquiry.

The inquiry is the second inquiry undertaken by the ACCC’s Financial Services Competition Branch (FSCB). The FSCB proactively monitors and promotes competition in Australia’s financial services sector by assessing competition issues and undertaking market studies.

Weak Australian dollar sees petrol prices at highest level in four years

The annual average retail petrol price in 2018–19 was the highest in real terms (i.e. adjusted for inflation) in four years according to the ACCC’s latest report on the Australian petroleum market for June quarter 2019.

The report shows that in the five largest cities, Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane, Adelaide and Perth, the average annual petrol price in 2018–19 was 141.2 cents per litre (cpl), nearly 7.0 cpl higher than last year.  In nominal terms (i.e. with prices not adjusted for inflation) it was the highest annual average price in five years.

Annual average retail petrol prices in the five largest cities in nominal and real terms: 2000–01 to 2018–19

“The most significant contributor to this increase was the depreciation over the year in the AUD-USD exchange rate, which decreased by USD 0.06 to USD 0.72,” said ACCC Chair Rod Sims.

“This was the lowest annual average AUD-USD exchange rate in the last 15 years. The AUD–USD exchange rate is a significant determinant of Australia’s retail petrol prices because international refined petrol is bought and sold in US dollars in global markets.”

A significant development in the petrol industry in the first half of 2019 has been the change in price setter at both Coles Express, to Viva Energy, and Woolworths, to EG Group, retail sites.

The report found that compared with market average prices, Coles Express prices were lower in most capital cities after Viva Energy began setting prices. However, they remained above the market average price in all eight capital cities. At Woolworths, prices were higher in most capital cities after EG Group took over the retail sites, although in the majority of cities, prices were still below the market average price.

“The ACCC will monitor prices at these retail sites very closely in future,” Mr Sims said.

Mr Sims said it was important for motorists to shop around for cheap fuel by using the available fuel price websites and apps. For those motorists in the five largest cities, they can also use information about petrol price cycles on the ACCC website to time their purchases.

Retail petrol prices in the three smaller capital cities; Canberra, Hobart and Darwin, are typically higher than prices in the five largest cities. However, the report noted that, in the first half of 2019, there were periods when prices in Darwin and Canberra were below prices in the five largest cities.

Monthly average retail prices in Darwin were lower than in the five largest cities between February and May 2019, and monthly average retail prices in Canberra were lower than in the five largest cities in both April and May 2019.

“This was the first time monthly average prices in Canberra were below the average price in the five largest cities since April 2012,” Mr Sims said. “The reduction in prices in the Darwin and Canberra is good news for motorists in those locations.”

The lower prices in Canberra may have been influenced by the possibility of greater regulation of the petroleum industry arising from the current ACT Legislative Assembly petrol inquiry. The situation in Canberra is similar to that in Darwin in 2015, when the decrease in petrol prices coincided with increased local scrutiny of petrol prices by the NT Government.

The report noted that in the June quarter 2019, average retail petrol prices across the five largest cities were 145.3 cpl, an increase of 15.0 cpl from the March quarter 2019. The principal driver of the increase was rising international crude oil and refined petrol prices in the quarter. These continue to be influenced by the agreements made since late-2016 by the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) cartel, and some other crude oil producing countries, including Russia, to cut production.

Other petrol fast facts:

  • Brisbane petrol prices were higher than the other large Australian cities.
  • The city–country petrol price differential decreased in the quarter to 1.5 cpl.
  • Analysis of NSW’s Coffs Harbour petrol prices shows there are a range of prices available to motorists if they shop around.
  • Diesel and automotive LPG prices in the five largest cities both increased.

Record losses expected as scammers target Australians

The ACCC says that Australians are set to lose a record amount to scams in 2019, with projections from losses reported to Scamwatch and other government agencies so far expected to exceed $532 million by the end of the year, surpassing half a billion dollars for the first time.

This year’s National Scams Awareness Week (12-16 August) theme is “too smart to be scammed?” and the ACCC, along with over 100 campaign partners from government and industry, is urging consumers to test their scams knowledge and refresh their scam protection and detection skills.

“Many people are confident they would never fall for a scam but often it’s this sense of confidence that scammers target,” ACCC Deputy Chair Delia Rickard said.

“People need to update their idea of what a scam is so that we are less vulnerable. Scammers are professional businesses dedicated to ripping us off. They have call centres with convincing scripts, staff training programs, and corporate performance indicators their ‘employees’ need to meet.”

Investment scams are one of the most sophisticated and convincing scams and continue to have the highest losses. Nearly half of all investment scams reported this year resulted in a financial loss.

These scams are prominent on social media, with ‘Facebook lottery’ scams, the ‘Loom’ pyramid scheme, and cryptocurrency scams particularly common.

Cryptocurrency investment scams have seen record losses, with reports to the ACCC alone of $14.76 million between January and July 2019. Many use social media platforms, fake celebrity endorsements or fake online trading platforms that are made to look legitimate.

Protection advice

“Our advice is to be wary of ads you see on the internet. Don’t be persuaded by celebrity endorsements or ‘not to be missed’ opportunities. You never know for certain who you’re dealing with or whether they’re credible,” Ms Rickard said.

“If you think you’re speaking to a friend on social media, call them, or find another way to contact them before acting on any advice that might result in you giving away your personal details or money.”

Scamwatch also suggests that people check ASIC’s list of companies you should not deal with. If the company that contacted you is on the list – do not deal with them, and even if they are not listed, continue researching and speak to a financial advisor before investing.

Be vigilant on social media, when shopping online and when answering the phone, and never give anyone who has contacted you out of the blue your personal details, banking details or remote access to your computer, no matter who they say they are. It’s best to assume scammers are everywhere, waiting for you to let your guard down.

“Remember, anyone could fall victim and no one is ‘too smart to be scammed’. Always ask yourself, ‘could this be a scam?’ and if you’re ever in doubt, decline the contact or hang up the phone – it’s often the safest option,” Ms Rickard said.

The ACCC has produced a series of videos with tips and tricks on how to spot a scam, and to test people’s awareness of scams. The full series is also available on YouTube.

Visit scamwatch.gov.au to report scams and learn how to protect yourself. You can also follow @scamwatch_gov on Twitter and  subscribe to Scamwatch radar alerts.

Monthly average losses to NBN scams almost triple in 2019

Australians are losing more money to NBN scams, with reported losses in 2019 already higher than the total of last year’s losses, according to the ACCC.

Consumers lost an average of more than $110,000 each month between January and May this year, compared with around $38,500 in monthly average losses throughout 2018 – an increase of nearly 300 per cent.  

“People aged over 65 are particularly vulnerable, making the most reports and losing more than $330,000 this year. That’s more than 60 per cent of the current losses,” ACCC Acting Chair Delia Rickard said.

“Scammers are increasingly using trusted brands like ‘NBN’ to trick unsuspecting consumers into parting with their money or personal information.”

Common types of NBN scams include:

  • Someone pretending to be from NBN Co or an internet provider calls a victim and claims there is a problem with their phone or internet connection, which requires remote access to fix. The scammer can then install malware or steal valuable personal information, including banking details.
  • Scammers pretending to be the NBN attempting to sell NBN services, often at a discount, or equipment to you over the phone.
  • Scammers may also call or visit people at their homes to sign them up to the NBN, get them a better deal or test the speed of their connection. They may ask people to provide personal details such as their name, address, date of birth, and Medicare number or ask for payment through gift cards.
  • Scammers calling you during a blackout offering you the ability to stay connected during a blackout for an extra fee.

It is important to remember NBN Co is a wholesale-only company and does not sell services directly to consumers.

“We will never make unsolicited calls or door knock to sell broadband services to the public. People need to contact their preferred phone and internet service provider to make the switch,” NBN Co Chief Security Officer Darren Kane said. 

“We will never request remote access to a resident’s computer and we will never make unsolicited requests for payment or financial information.”

“If someone claiming to work ‘for the NBN’ tries to sell you an internet or phone service and you are unsure, ask for their details, hang up, and call your service provider to check if they’re legitimate. Do a Google search or check the phone book to get your service provider’s number, don’t use contact details provided by the sales person,” Ms Rickard said.

“Never give an unsolicited caller remote access to your computer, and never give out your personal, credit card or online account details to anyone you don’t know – in person or over the phone – unless you made the contact.”

“It’s also important to know that NBN does not make automated calls to tell you that you will be disconnected. If you get a call like this just hang up.”

“If you think a scammer has gained access to your personal information, such as bank account details, contact your financial institution immediately.”