Imagine being charged unfair fees by your bank, fees that eat into your already tight budget for essentials like food and bills. Now imagine that bank refusing to refund those fees, even when it’s clear they were in the wrong. That’s exactly what happened to thousands of low-income customers of the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CommBank), until a relentless campaign by consumer advocacy group CHOICE forced a dramatic U-turn. But here’s where it gets controversial: even after agreeing to refund $68 million, CommBank still hasn’t committed to helping all affected customers, leaving many wondering if justice has truly been served.
After months of stonewalling, Australia’s largest bank finally caved just before Christmas, announcing it would refund “relevant concession customers” a portion of the $270 million in excessive fees it had charged. These fees, which included account-keeping and overdraft charges, were levied against customers on Centrelink incomes who should have been automatically switched to low-fee or no-fee accounts. The issue came to light in July 2025 when the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) found that several banks had engaged in this practice. While other banks quickly issued bulk refunds, CommBank dug in its heels, with CEO Matt Comyn controversially claiming that refunding the fees would be “appropriating shareholder money.”
And this is the part most people miss: despite CommBank’s $10 billion annual profit, the bank initially prioritized shareholders over vulnerable customers. ASIC Commissioner Alan Kirkland expressed disappointment that some low-income customers might still receive nothing. “These are people on very low incomes,” he said. “Every dollar taken from their accounts is a dollar they can’t spend on basics like groceries or energy bills.”
CHOICE’s campaign played a pivotal role in forcing CommBank’s hand. Over 27,000 supporters signed a petition, and the bank was awarded a Shonky Award in November—a public shaming that helped build pressure. Morgan Campbell, CHOICE’s head of policy, called it a “big win” but emphasized that the fight isn’t over. “CommBank should never have charged these fees in the first place,” he said. “We need to see longer-term changes to their products and processes to ensure this never happens again.”
Here’s the real question: Is CommBank’s $68 million refund enough, or should they be held accountable for the full $270 million? And what does this say about corporate responsibility when profits seem to outweigh customer welfare? Let’s keep the conversation going—what do you think? Should CommBank do more, or is this a fair resolution? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
