# ASIC Warns Superannuation Funds Over Poor Complaint Handling Practices Regulators demand accountability as super funds face criticism for blaming members for systemic failures. - **Source:** [Sydney Morning Herald - Business](https://www.smh.com.au/rss/business.xml) - **Published:** 2026-11-01 - **Topic:** [Finance](https://brifing.si/c/finance) - **Original article:** - **On Brifing:** https://brifing.si/s/d8a4c547-2ab4-485b-8735-4c55cc80a470 ## Regulatory Pressure on Trustees The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has issued a stern warning to superannuation trustees regarding inadequate complaint handling. Regulators are threatening enforcement action against funds that consistently fail to address member concerns. This intervention follows reports that many trustees are ignoring growing volumes of complaints, potentially masking significant systemic operational failures. ## Complaints as Early Warnings Commissioner Simone Constant describes customer complaints as a critical canary in the coalmine for the industry. These reports often signal deeper issues like payment errors, service delays, and potential fraud. Ignoring these warnings risks snowballing into larger institutional failures, which ultimately erodes trust in the multi-trillion dollar Australian superannuation system. ## Surge in Sector Complaints Data from the Australian Financial Complaints Authority indicates that superannuation complaints increased by over 40 percent during the last financial year. As the population ages, the relationship between members and their funds becomes increasingly vital. The regulator notes that funds are currently less effective at identifying systemic issues than external authorities. ## Failure to Analyze Data ASIC investigations revealed that nearly one quarter of the 45 examined trustees do not regularly analyze complaint data to identify systemic trends. Furthermore, one third of these trustees failed to report a single issue over a two-year period. The commission views this lack of reported issues as a significant red flag. ## Blaming the Customer Strategy Many trustees are criticized for too readily attributing the root cause of complaints to member expectations or errors. Commissioner Constant emphasized that blaming the messenger is not a valid strategy. Over 60 percent of the time, funds ignore potential internal process failures or poor communication, choosing instead to deflect responsibility onto members. ## Real World Impact These governance issues have tangible consequences for individuals, particularly regarding access to retirement savings and insurance claims. In one instance, a tax-related system error remained unaddressed for years, potentially impacting 1200 members. Such delays prevent individuals from receiving entitled support, highlighting that these are not merely abstract or administrative policy concerns. ## Enforcement and Legal Precedent The regulator has signaled it will prioritize oversight for trustees that fail to take timely corrective action. Previous legal actions, such as the Federal Court ordering Cbus to pay a 23.5 million dollar penalty for unreasonable delays in death benefit claims, demonstrate the commission's willingness to pursue formal enforcement when public interest is at stake. ## Future Regulatory Expectations Trustees are now required to review internal dispute resolution arrangements to better identify and respond to systemic issues. The commission remains prepared to utilize supervisory engagement, licensing conditions, and further enforcement actions. Funds must shift their focus from blaming members to fixing the underlying operational processes that drive current member dissatisfaction. ## Sources covering this story - https://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/super-funds-slammed-for-blaming-customers-for-complaints-20261102-p61a1n.html?ref=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_source=rss_business — --- _Summary written by Brifing from the original reporting. Copyright in the original article belongs to its publisher; read the full piece at the link above._