As more people fall into arrears on their loans, banks have increased their penalty fees.
According to the RBA the banks have had a 9 per cent increase in penalty fees on loans to $536 million as borrowers struggle with their loan repayments.
And the banks are also under pressure to recoup more than $1 billion per year from other areas.
ANZ is the first of the major banks to be hit with legal action on fees. Customers lodged a $50 million class action in the Federal Court yesterday alleging it wrongfully charged hundreds of millions of dollars in penalty fees in the past six years.
While this legal action is more of a test case for the banking industry, it may be the first of many to follow.
ANZ acknowledged exception fees were unpopular, but said it would defend the legal action. “It’s a big leap, however, for a fee to go from being unpopular to being unlawful. ANZ will be defending this claim vigorously,” said ANZ’s Australian operations chief executive, Philip Chronican.
ANZ had reworked its fees and charges in December.
Banking analysts said the loss of fee income was a blow for the sector already feeling the squeeze from a sharp rise in wholesale funding costs.
Exception fees on credit cards make up the largest share of penalty fees paid by households.
For ANZ, a potential $50 million payout represents little more than 1 per cent of this year’s expected profit. But analysts said the impact on its bigger rivals could be larger.
To avoid penalties from the regulators, banks have in the past removed various penalty fees to appease customers.
Westpac will be the biggest hit, losing $300 million in annual exception fee revenue, translating to $210 million in lost earnings. Commonwealth stands to lose $200 million in revenue, translating to a $135 million hit to earnings. The annual revenue impact for ANZ and NAB is also about $200 million.
The main point of contention in the legal action against ANZ is that the bank had been ”unjustly enriched” by the penalty fees at the expense of those customers paying the fees.
Two years ago, the Office of Fair Trading in Britain had initiated legal action against the NAB over bank charges.
NAB’s Clydesdale Bank was one of seven British lenders that had challenged the ability of the OFT to investigate whether overdraft fees were fair under laws governing the terms of consumer contracts.
While the consumer watchdog won its initial legal bid to investigate the fairness of charges, this was later overruled by a higher court. The equivalent of $4.6 billion in annual revenue was at stake had the Office of Fair Trading won.
Recently, Australian banks argued against the introduction of rules banning ”unfair terms” in contracts, a measure that would reduce their ability to enforce fees