Has anyone considered escalating this with the Financial ombudsman?
The thing is that the term government charges is not the same as paying for a government service. A government charge might be something like stamp duty (which was removed with the GST). If I pay rates or fines with my card, there is no problem according to Citibank - but the ATO payments it is suddenly a problem. Nobody at Citibank call centre understands this concept and they got quite flustered when I pointed out the difference and my legal entitlement. Then there is the RTA (or various roads authorities), local rates etc. These would fall under 'government charges' if Citibank are using it mean money you pay to any government. The list is quite long of government departments where points are still given. I think someone at Citibank didn't like the huge chunks of points going through as ATO payments and has tried to (in my view, illegally) stop it.
My experience with the Ombudsman is that in a case like this, then they give it higher priority based on the number of complaints. If you are complaining about say 5000 points, they may see little value in looking at it, but 100 people with the same complaint is different.
Some technicalities.
Firstly Citibank allowed the ATO transactions to go through for years and award points, so there is an expectation that we should continue to receive it unless otherwise notified. ie, an implied contract.
Secondly, Citibank are using the wrong terms at their call centre. I haven't flagged this with them yet. But in their documents, they refer to 'Retail Purchases' as being the only ones eligible for points. This is defined in another document 'Retail Purchase: a Transaction other than a Cash Advance or a Special Promotion, as determined by us at our discretion.' (from Unsecured Revolving Credit Terms and Conditions). When you call them, they incorrectly state ATO payment as a government charge, which it is not. It is a payment for service, hence the surcharge when you pay the ATO (this is different to a cash advance -taking cash out and transferring it to the ATO).
When it comes down to it, Citibank will argue that it's their discretion that allowed us to get the points in the first place. The counter argument is that they allowed the charges through for an extended period, implying a contract where we would reasonably expect it to be ongoing unless notified (and it's the reason I used my Citibank card for the ATO payment and not another card). In addition they are applying their own terms incorrectly in dealing with us. Therefore, their defence doesn't hold as they are not addressing the issue but something legally unrelated.
Personally, I am down over 30,000 points. They made a vague counter offer for the ATO payment and promised to contact me again, but haven't as yet.
.
