CommBank Just Got Shamed for Refusing $270 Million Refund to Poorest Customers — While Celebrating $10 Billion Profit

"Thumbing Its Nose at Its Low-Income Customers"

Imagine you're on JobSeeker, struggling to buy groceries during a cost-of-living crisis. Your bank quietly charges you $15 per month in account-keeping fees, plus overdraft fees when your balance dips negative.

Meanwhile, your bank offers a free account specifically for people in your situation—but never tells you about it, never transfers you to it, and keeps charging you those fees year after year.

That's what happened to 2.2 million Commonwealth Bank customers. And when caught, Australia's biggest bank refused to give the money back.

"Commonwealth Bank has taken bad bank behaviour to a whole new level," said Ashley de Silva, CEO of consumer advocacy group CHOICE. "We think that's pretty shonky."

The Record Nobody Wants

On Wednesday, CHOICE announced its 2025 Shonky Awards—an annual name-and-shame report calling out Australia's worst products and dodgy business practices.

Commonwealth Bank received a special prize: its fourth Shonky Award, making it "the most awarded Australian company in Shonky's history."

Previous Shonky Awards for CommBank include:

• 2018: The Dollarmites program using "subversive sales tactics" in primary schools
• 2014: Financial planners placing clients in risky investments to meet bonus goals
• 2010: Poor-performing credit card linked to Qantas Frequent Flyer program

But this year's award hits different—because it involves taking money from some of Australia's most financially vulnerable people.

How the Scandal Unfolded

July 2024: ASIC's first investigation found banks were charging Indigenous Australians excessive fees despite eligibility for low-fee accounts. CommBank refunded $25 million to approximately 87,000 Indigenous customers as "goodwill payments."

July 2025: ASIC's second investigation ("Better and Beyond" report) found the problem was far bigger—affecting 770,000 customers across 21 banks, with $270 million in fees charged by CommBank alone to 2.2 million non-Indigenous low-income customers.

Other Banks' Response: Most banks immediately agreed to bulk refunds:

• ANZ: $47.9 million refunded
• Other 20 banks: Total $93 million refunded collectively
• Banks also moved 820,000 customers to low-fee accounts

CommBank's Response:

• Initially refused any refunds
• Then offered "case-by-case" consideration only
• Set aside $52 million for "domestic customer remediation" but wouldn't explain what it covered
• "Temporarily paused" some fees but made no commitment to refund past charges

The Fees That Should Never Have Been Charged

The fees in question included:

• Monthly account-keeping fees: Typically $4-$15 per month
• Dishonour fees: Charged when payments bounce due to insufficient funds
• Overdraft fees: Charged when accounts go into negative balance

These fees hit hardest on people with the least money. One customer example from the ASIC report shows how devastating they can be:

Charlotte, an ANZ customer from Mandurah, WA on JobSeeker, was refunded $5,200 by ANZ—equivalent to 13 weeks of JobSeeker payments. This included over $4,160 in dishonour fees alone.

CommBank charged similar fees to 2.2 million customers over five years. At an average of just $125 per customer, that's $270 million total.

What CommBank Should Have Done

Under the Banking Code of Practice, banks are required to:

• Identify low-income customers receiving government concessions
• Proactively promote basic, low-fee or no-fee accounts
• Transfer eligible customers to appropriate accounts

CommBank offers the Streamline Basic accountfor concession cardholders with:

• $0 monthly fees
• $0 overdraft fees
• $0 access fees

The bank says it contacts eligible customers annually about this account. But clearly, those notifications weren't working—2.2 million customers remained in high-fee accounts for years.

ASIC found that customers "should have been automatically transferred" to low-fee accounts, not just told about them in letters many never read.

The Case That Shocked Everyone

CHOICE highlighted one particularly egregious case: a family violence survivor on a Centrelink income who had to overdraw her account to flee abuse.

She was hit with overdraft fees for the emergency withdrawal she needed to escape danger. When she tried to get those fees waived by CommBank, she faced difficulty getting any relief.

This is someone who used the bank account to literally save her own life—and CommBank charged her penalty fees for it.

CommBank's Defense

In a statement to Yahoo Finance, a CommBank spokesperson said:

"We are committed to making banking fair and accessible. In July, we committed to making goodwill adjustments where appropriate to customers who have incurred unusually high fees. For eligible concession customers, we have paused certain fees, including overdraw and monthly account-keeping fees."

The bank also defended its original fee-charging:

"The concession customer group is a diverse cohort, including customers with varying levels of income, savings and home ownership. The fees ASIC references were disclosed to customers, incurred based on their individual use of their accounts, and charged in accordance with their terms and conditions."

Translation: "The fees were legal and disclosed, so we don't have to refund them—even if they were unfair and charged to people who should have been in free accounts."

The Public Backlash

The refusal sparked outrage across Australia.

CHOICE launched a petition calling on CEO Matt Comyn to refund the fees. Over 21,000 people have signed.

A national poll found 88% of Australians think CommBank should refund the fees.

ASIC Commissioner Alan Kirkland publicly called out CommBank: "The CBA's approach stands in stark contrast to those of the other banks, including ANZ, which has offered refunds of around $48 million. It is very clear what is the right thing for CBA to do by its customers, and they've now got an opportunity to reflect on how they stand relative to other banks and do the right thing."

CHOICE Policy Head Morgan Campbell was more direct: "A few weeks after refusing to pay $270 million in refunds, CommBank celebrated a $10 billion dollar annual profit. It is thumbing its nose at ASIC, and at its low-income customers."

The Numbers That Make This Worse

Let's put this in perspective:

CommBank's annual profit: $10 billion
Amount CommBank refuses to refund: $270 million (2.7% of annual profit)
CommBank's cash reserves: $49.6 billion in notes and coins
Number of affected customers: 2.2 million low-income Australians

What $270 million represents:

• 2.7% of one year's profit
• 0.54% of the bank's cash reserves
• An average of $123 per affected customer
• Money that would be life-changing for people on Centrelink, but barely noticeable for Australia's most profitable bank

Why NAB Isn't In This Scandal

Interestingly, National Australia Bank (NAB) was not part of ASIC's investigation at all.

Why? In 2014, NAB stopped charging dishonour, account-keeping and overdraw fees on all transaction accounts.

While CommBank and others were raking in hundreds of millions from fee income, NAB proved it was possible to run a profitable bank without hitting vulnerable customers with excessive charges.

This makes CommBank's position even harder to defend.

The "Case-by-Case" Trap

After initially refusing all refunds, CommBank said it would consider refunds "on a case-by-case basis."

Consumer advocates say this is deliberately unhelpful because:

It puts the burden on customers who may not know they're entitled to refunds
Many affected customers may have changed addresses or banks since the fees were charged
The process is slow and bureaucratic, discouraging people from pursuing small amounts
No clear criteria for who gets refunds versus who doesn't

Compare this to ANZ's approach: automatic bulk refunds, no application needed. One woman from WA woke up to find $5,200 deposited in her account—money she didn't even know she was owed.

What Happens Next

For CommBank: The Shonky Award adds to mounting public pressure. With 88% public disapproval and even ASIC criticizing their approach, the reputational damage may eventually force action.

For affected customers: If you had a CommBank account between July 2019 and October 2024 and received Centrelink payments (JobSeeker, Age Pension, Disability Support, etc.), you may be entitled to a refund. Contact CommBank directly or file a complaint with AFCA (Australian Financial Complaints Authority).

For the banking sector: This scandal highlights ongoing problems with the industry's treatment of vulnerable customers, despite commitments made after the Banking Royal Commission.

Other 2025 Shonky Winners

CommBank shared the dishonor with other companies called out by CHOICE:

• Temu: Dodgy sales tactics and fast fashion peddling
• Energy retailers: Confusing price advertising
• A faulty heater: That simply didn't work as advertised

But CommBank's win stands out as the only one involving a major Australian institution systematically overcharging millions of vulnerable people while recording record profits.

The Banking Royal Commission Echo

In 2017-2019, Australia held a Banking Royal Commission that exposed widespread misconduct across the financial sector, including:

• Charging fees for no service
• Providing poor financial advice to benefit the bank
• Failing to act in customers' best interests
• Prioritizing profit over customer welfare

The Commission led to promises of reform, better customer treatment, and a renewed focus on doing "the right thing."

CommBank's website even has "a whole page dedicated" to its "commitment to customers," as CHOICE sarcastically noted.

Yet here we are in 2025, with Australia's biggest bank refusing to refund $270 million to its poorest customers while celebrating a $10 billion profit.

As Morgan Campbell put it: "These were unfair fees, they should never have been charged. CommBank needs to do the decent thing and refund them. By continuing to dig in, they're thumbing their nose at ASIC, their customers, and public opinion."

The Bottom Line

Commonwealth Bank charged 2.2 million low-income Australians $270 million in fees they shouldn't have paid—then refused to give the money back when caught.

While ANZ and 20 other banks did the right thing and issued refunds, CommBank—Australia's largest and most profitable bank—dug in its heels.

The result? A record fourth Shonky Award, public outrage, ASIC criticism, and a petition with over 21,000 signatures demanding refunds.

For a bank that made $10 billion in profit last year and sits on nearly $50 billion in cash, refunding $270 million wouldn't cause financial hardship. It would, however, acknowledge that taking money from vulnerable people who couldn't afford it was wrong.

So far, CommBank isn't willing to make that acknowledgment.

As Bettina Cooper from Mob Strong Debt Help said: "Penny pinching on account fees received from low income people doing it tough in a cost-of-living crisis while making super profits is not great optics. Particularly when your rivals are stepping up and doing the right thing and returning fees, some with interest."

Sometimes doing the right thing isn't complicated. Sometimes it just requires having the decency to return money you never should have taken in the first place.