.svg){kind=small}
The same measure might also be applied to banking and remediation issues, as the last couple of decades of frenzied resource reallocation to business critical but confidential projects will attest.
Remediation is hard and time consuming, and almost always the value remediated is dwarfed by the cost of finding it. Too often, remediators are advised to chase to the decimal point when the regulator would have been happy with an approximation, with a top-up to ensure the payment was within an acceptable agreed level of confidence.
This space does seem to have become an industry in its own right – arguably unnecessarily so to the extent it has. Given the current body of customer protection regulation, COFI in particular, surely expediency and an agreed modest overpayment is the preferred course? (in my experience, it was a $37.15 interest overpayment after 4 years, not the best good customer outcome).
As we speed into an AI-driven future, the regulator and indeed customers might well have an expectation that these issues are resolved faster and better, which doesn’t seem unreasonable.
The new set of tools could also quite reasonably be deployed to proactively identify remediation issues where previously it would have involved prohibitive resource and cost impacts and a risk profile untenable for many executives.
As regulators familiarity with the possible increases, so will their expectation that the industry applies these tools pre-emptively to protect customers interests and redress errors. They are likely to be more lenient with their charges showing a bit of proactivity than those who choose not to despite having the means at their disposal.
We have been deliberate about keeping across developments in this space – if you’d like to have a conversation around where we are currently and are likely to go, please get in touch – our Data as a Service team would be more than happy to chat.
The same measure might also be applied to banking and remediation issues, as the last couple of decades of frenzied resource reallocation to business critical but confidential projects will attest.
Remediation is hard and time consuming, and almost always the value remediated is dwarfed by the cost of finding it. Too often, remediators are advised to chase to the decimal point when the regulator would have been happy with an approximation, with a top-up to ensure the payment was within an acceptable agreed level of confidence.
This space does seem to have become an industry in its own right – arguably unnecessarily so to the extent it has. Given the current body of customer protection regulation, COFI in particular, surely expediency and an agreed modest overpayment is the preferred course? (in my experience, it was a $37.15 interest overpayment after 4 years, not the best good customer outcome).
As we speed into an AI-driven future, the regulator and indeed customers might well have an expectation that these issues are resolved faster and better, which doesn’t seem unreasonable.
The new set of tools could also quite reasonably be deployed to proactively identify remediation issues where previously it would have involved prohibitive resource and cost impacts and a risk profile untenable for many executives.
As regulators familiarity with the possible increases, so will their expectation that the industry applies these tools pre-emptively to protect customers interests and redress errors. They are likely to be more lenient with their charges showing a bit of proactivity than those who choose not to despite having the means at their disposal.
We have been deliberate about keeping across developments in this space – if you’d like to have a conversation around where we are currently and are likely to go, please get in touch – our Data as a Service team would be more than happy to chat.
