ANZ Cancelling or Suspending Points

[daveozsydney]

Agree had balance which they have now suspended after a phone call saying business transactions and all points forfeited. No notice!

I would ask specifically what clause of the terms and conditions have been breached. I just checked a document (not sure if it was the correct version) and it says
"
Points will not accrue in relation to interest charges, premiums paid for
ANZ Credit Card Insurance, government charges, bank fees, Card account
adjustments resulting from disputed transactions or otherwise, Balance
Transfers, cash advances and Cash Equivalent Transactions"

So I assume government charges would qualify like ATO type stuff

https://www.anz.com.au/content/dam/...antas-frequent-flyer-terms-and-conditions.pdf

I haven't read them fully. It then references.

I could possibly add some weight to your argument, as an ANZ Shareholder I could write to them and ask why they take this particular course of action when in my opinion it hurts their business - I assume you are no longer likely to spend 300K on their cards and they won't earn x% of that as middlemen/women so there is an opportunity cost to their business.

Possibly the idiot who came up with or agreed to the Citibank earn rate changes and announced them contrary to their terms and conditions (much to the disdain of many of AFF) got fired and picked up a job at ANZ.

I can't find any terms and conditions that suggest no business use. The only thing I saw was
"
We may also cancel Reward Points at our sole

discretion if you die, if your card account is

suspended, if you breach or any additional

cardholder breaches these terms and conditions

or the ANZ Credit Cards Conditions of Use or if we

reasonably suspect you are operating your card

account fraudulently."

Was the use of the card spending on goods and services or anything that could be deemed fraudulent use - maybe charging to your own merchant account - rinse and repeat?
Even so it would be hard to argue that was fraudulent....

So first step I would find out what term you have breached then you have an opportunity to make a cohesive argument against this action.

 

[JohnPhelan]

Please wait until Ive finished the post and quote the entire section in context before you launch your next round of vitriol.

Thanks.

....err, no-one is physically able to quote a post until you've.... posted it.

 

[jastel]

It's pretty simple from the banks POV, Business spend should be done on a Business Credit Card. Personal spend on personal card.

 

[Moopere]

It's pretty simple from the banks POV, Business spend should be done on a Business Credit Card. Personal spend on personal card.

Yes but the whole debate so far has really centred around determining what exactly is business spend ... really ... what is it?

 

[jastel]

They exclude ATO, utilities, government charges etc on personal cards so that leaves only personal spending for food and living etc. I would guess it is tracked by a computer and any major changes to spending patterns would be flagged. Like if you suddenly start to spend money in Russia without telling them they suspect fraud.
Having large amounts of the excluded charges on a personal card will raise flags.

 

[anat0l]

Yes but the whole debate so far has really centred around determining what exactly is business spend ... really ... what is it?

More accurately, who is responsible for proving to the other whether it was or was not business spend? (Note I said who is, not should be)

 

[lwcarden]

I find this hard to believe - we had a business account with NAB for years and all the points were credited to us. In fact, it was a business account that gave Frequent Flyer points - but having heard other negative experiences with ANZ I am not surprised.

 

[Roberto]

Indeed it does seem fairly clear cut, and those conditions are there for a very good reason. The "personal, domestic or household use" part will be derived from Consumer Credit code provisions. There are protections available to consumers (hardship provisions and the like), which only apply to consumer credit, which mean that banks have to treat consumer and business accounts differently.

There have been comments about "why do the banks care if it is business spend - it is all the same as far as they are concerned". Actually, not the case. We are talking credit accounts here, and different types of lending have to be classified differently, and have different capital adequacy requirements, hence the cost of a "business" credit account to the bank may be far higher in cost of capital than a "consumer" account.

The bank cannot turn a blind eye to the transaction types, as it is then risking not complying with prudential requirements. Small amounts are not so significant, as the actual classification probably only covers "predominantly", and the whole exercise is about risk - but make the majority of your spend business expenses on a consumer account at your own peril.

Amex is a totally different beast, as it is not a bank, so totally different rules apply - with much more ability for Amex to manage their risk as they see fit (there being no depositors being protected by the banking regulations).

Actually that's not quite true - it depends on the size of the business.

If the business is a small business you have essentially the same protection as an individual. Even ANZ's T&C's state:
"If you are an individual or a small business (as defined by the Code of Banking Practice) ANZ is bound by the Code of Banking Practice when it provides its products and services to you."

I would argue that the spend of a small business in which I am the owner or significant shareholder would be "personal".

In any case, the OP should escalate this by taking it to the complaints department of ANZ and advising them that if he was not satisfied with the outcome he would take this to the Financial Ombudsman.

Just having the Financial Ombudsman involved costs the bank money, so they are usually willing to negotiate. However I would not expect to get the full points returned.

As for sweeping points to airlines - I think banks, besides being b******s are probably more secure than most airlines, viz. Ansett.

 

[Deleted member]

My bolding. Sort of the point really. Consumer law protects consumers - Business transactions for the most part are outside of Consumer protections (especially when this is Consumer Credit Law we are talking about).

I would be fairly certain, that it is not just the T&C that has this, but there will have been a declaration on the Credit Application, along with the required Consumer Credit disclosures that would have talked about using the credit for personal, domestic or household use. I am sure the OP read the application declarations carefully before signing.... (not that it matters...)

It still leaves a sour taste in ones mouth, a warning may have been a more sensible move.

 

[Deleted member]

With all due respect to the OP. for that kind of business spend there quite a few personally backed business credit cards out there that do attract points (CBA bus plat for example). I know some have upper limits within a year but still.. thats a hell of a lot business expenditure on a personal card. Its certianly not for me to tell ppl how to spend their money but still $200K of spending in a short period of time would certainly attract the attention of the "falcon"

I considered getting a biz CC, in the end I decided it was too much bother, we do very nicely with our range of personal cards, and so far no problems (fingers crossed). The hoops one has to jump through for a biz cc are frankly a big Wa*k.

 

[Deleted member]

875,757 points gone which credited in nov15. ANZ took the fees though from processing the transactions. Raised dispute with them.

Banking ombudsman is the go here methinks.

 

[DaveB]

I would think that unless you have invoices not in a business name, very hard to win against the bank already happy to burn you.
Interesting times and makes those that recently acquired their cards for one purpose now ending think twice about how long the points stay with the bank.
Wonder what caused the flag to be raised in this case and whether it is tied to any ATO's expanded reporting being requested of the banks.
Not that it gets much use, Westpac enabled me to transfer a considerable points bank accrued for one purpose now ended across to a new business CC.

 

[daveozsydney]

I considered getting a biz CC, in the end I decided it was too much bother, we do very nicely with our range of personal cards, and so far no problems (fingers crossed). The hoops one has to jump through for a biz cc are frankly a big Wa*k.

Was given a business card - credit limit 3K. Personal limit 50K. Which one would I use for a purchase of 18K? Cash, or transfer 18K to my business card first? Pretty obvious really.

Surely for the bank going after you personally has a higher chance of success than going after an insolvent business if the funds are not repaid.

Would love to know what terms were breached and also why the big deal about this or do they prefer consumer credit because people are more likely to default or miss payments?

 

[trippin_the_rift]

Was given a business card - credit limit 3K. Personal limit 50K. Which one would I use for a purchase of 18K? Cash, or transfer 18K to my business card first? Pretty obvious really.

Surely for the bank going after you personally has a higher chance of success than going after an insolvent business if the funds are not repaid.

Would love to know what terms were breached and also why the big deal about this or do they prefer consumer credit because people are more likely to default or miss payments?

Financial Institutions are not known for their innovation.

Banks should 'allow' biz related transactions, but to add security, require a bond equal to your credit limit as security IF you spend more than 100% of your credit limit each month. Gives security to the bank and would mitigate some risk, gives extra capital on hand so they can leverage the ratio to lend out more, nobody gets screwed on points - and if more businesses took up the option maybe we can get past this 1930s BS of 60, 90, 120++ day terms when biz charge each others credit cards. Banks will make more money with more payments going through the card systems and no more chasing up or manually inputting invoice payments. In USA this would save about 500 billion trees a year from being cut down to produce checks.

Anyone else got a business problem need solving?

 

[daveozsydney]

Financial Institutions are not known for their innovation.

Banks should 'allow' biz related transactions, but to add security, require a bond equal to your credit limit as security IF you spend more than 100% of your credit limit each month. Gives security to the bank and would mitigate some risk, gives extra capital on hand so they can leverage the ratio to lend out more, nobody gets screwed on points - and if more businesses took up the option maybe we can get past this 1930s BS of 60, 90, 120++ day terms when biz charge each others credit cards. Banks will make more money with more payments going through the card systems and no more chasing up or manually inputting invoice payments. In USA this would save about 500 billion trees a year from being cut down to produce checks.

Anyone else got a business problem need solving?

Clearly you don't work for a bank! Too innovative ideas being espoused there for the industry!
I heard from someone that one of the issues was companies paying tax due on cards then going into receivership (changing the order of creditors rankings in the event of a default i.e. the ATO get their money so they go away) leaving unsecured creditors.

It would be good to work out what the real reasons are for the personal/business split.

 

[Scr77]

Clearly you don't work for a bank! Too innovative ideas being espoused there for the industry!
I heard from someone that one of the issues was companies paying tax due on cards then going into receivership (changing the order of creditors rankings in the event of a default i.e. the ATO get their money so they go away) leaving unsecured creditors.

It would be good to work out what the real reasons are for the personal/business split.

This is an extremely interesting point, but the banks could decline the transaction instead of just denying the points.

 

[burmans]

This is an extremely interesting point, but the banks could decline the transaction instead of just denying the points.

Yes, I think the points are a minor consideration in this scenario vs getting your money back.

 

[coco50]

More accurately, who is responsible for proving to the other whether it was or was not business spend? (Note I said who is, not should be)

I think that the way the ATO operates is that the onus of proof is on the claimant. In other words, the opposite to the onus of proof in a criminal court. Here we are talking about ANZ who will (like many other big businesses) manipulate their T&Cs to their benefit - not the customers. It looks like in this case a decision has been made which could constitute a denial of natural justice.

 

[ayebee]

Sorry, coming to this thread late ...

I recently had an issue with ANZ concerning QFF points (from the original application for a Rewards Black card a year before), so I "sleuthed" the direct email for the responsible manager, and emailed him explaining why I was cancelling the card having put $100k through in the year. This caused instant change in the customer "service" people who had previously stonewalled. The points were awarded, plus the annual fees rebated.

I also notice ANZ recently changed their T&Cs to exclude ATO (& other) "cash like" transactions. even though they eventually did the right thing for me, I will probably still look for another card in the next year before the next round of annual charges comes due.

 

[Kilo]

I've managed to push a couple of hundred k through via one of our favourite expenses.
The points all landed safely and did not spend a day in the ANZ warehouse before I moved them somewhere safer