oz_mark
Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2002
- Posts
- 21,673
I don't think it'll make much difference to anyone's finances, period. People have put up with this for a long time and frankly if people were really passionately against it,
Sure, we will be "counting" the savings and reflecting on the achievement, but why should we applaud ourselves when this whole change process has been so passive, if there will actually be change?
- Litigation should have happened much earlier
- There would have been a much more pronounced use of fee-free payment methods
- These changes would've occurred much, much earlier, with a lot more gusto and affirmative action
Consumer advocates like Choice are not much better. They "pride" themselves on being a consumer voice, and they will surely take credit for this "progress", but ultimately they are extremely self-serving and I would be very surprised if they honestly cared about the consumers that they are trying to be a voice for.
There weren't really any grounds to litigate under, the RBA let it be a free for all. The changes don't really go far enough in reining the problem in. Indeed, under the proposed changes, I suggest lawyers arguing over what is 'reasonable' is going to be the main outcome.
The thing is, for the first few years, there weren't the same levels of surcharges as there are now, although the worst offenders (the taxi industry) have been there the whole time.