ASIC sues Commonwealth Bank over alleged CommBiz fee overcharging

Traders Union
All News
Regulators
ASIC sues CommBank over fees

Highlights

ASIC has commenced civil penalty proceedings against Commonwealth Bank of Australia over alleged undisclosed CommBiz fee charges impacting business customers since 2006.
ASIC claims CBA maintained misleading CommBiz fee terms for nearly 19 years, with internal audits and complaints identifying overcharging as early as 2015 and 2016.
The regulator seeks declarations, pecuniary penalties, adverse publicity and ancillary orders, intensifying its enforcement focus on systemic failures and misleading pricing practices among large financial institutions.

Allegations over CommBiz fee disclosures

As reported by ASIC, the regulator has commenced civil penalty proceedings against Commonwealth Bank of Australia, alleging the bank's CommBiz terms and conditions did not clearly and accurately disclose all fees charged for Direct Debit and Direct Credit payments.

ASIC alleges business customers were told they would pay a fee for a payment to or from a third-party account, but the bank also charged an additional undisclosed fee for the corresponding movement of money into or out of the customer's own CommBiz account. In one example cited by the regulator, a small business paying fortnightly wages to 10 employees from two CommBiz accounts was charged 12 fees, 10 for the employee payments and another two for withdrawals from its own accounts.

The regulator further alleges misleading terms remained in place from the launch of CommBiz in 2006, meaning customers were overcharged for around 19 years. ASIC is also alleging governance failings at CBA meant the statements were not identified and corrected, and that the bank failed to act efficiently, honestly and fairly.

Regulatory focus and potential consequences

ASIC Commissioner Alan Kirkland says the case reflects a failure by Australia's biggest bank to meet basic obligations to business customers, many of them small businesses, over many years. He says the alleged conduct is particularly concerning because it continued despite customer complaints dating back at least to 2015 and a 2016 internal audit that identified overcharging of Direct Debit fees and required corrective action.

ASIC says the case aligns with its broader enforcement priority targeting systemic failures by large financial institutions that cause widespread consumer harm, as well as its 2026 focus on misleading pricing practices amid cost-of-living pressures. The regulator is seeking declarations, pecuniary penalties, adverse publicity orders, ancillary orders and costs, while the court has not yet listed the matter for a case management hearing.

As noted in our earlier article, the Bank of England urged lenders to strengthen bare metal recovery options as AI intensifies cyber threats.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.