Tyler said he did not want to provide his tax file number. He considered the request unlawful and pointed to the strict privacy protections governing the release of such numbers in Australia. He said the bank's refusal to vary the loan agreement without his number amounted to the use of an internal policy decision to induce default, thereby enabling the bank to apply a default interest rate to both loans. He considered this to be coercive and an unfair banking practice.

Our investigation

The bank was under no obligation to agree to vary Tyler's loan contract, which made clear that any variations to it were at the bank’s discretion. We also found the bank had the authority, as set out in the Common Reporting Standard codified into the Tax Administration Act 1994, to request Tyler's Australian tax file number as part of its consideration of his loan variation request. In fact, New Zealand law required the bank to use reasonable efforts to obtain and report the number. The bank’s request was therefore not a breach of his privacy.

We also found the bank did not incorrectly or unfairly apply a default interest rate. Tyler's loan repayment account had become overdrawn, and his loan agreement stipulated that the bank would charge a default interest rate when this happened.

Outcome

We did not uphold Tyler's complaint.