The following abbreviations have the following meaning;

 ASFPNG                       Association of Superannuation Funds of PNG

ASFA                           Association of Superannuation Funds of Australia 

CC                                Complaints Committee

The Act                         Superannuation Act 2000 General Provisions Amendments

ASF                              Approved Super Fund

STF                              Superannuation Task Force

POSF                           Public Officers Superannuation Fund

FPSF                            Finance Pacific Superannuation Fund

NASFUND                     National Superannuation Fund

PNGLS                         PNG Law Society

PNGIA                          PNG Institute of Accountants

BPNG                           Bank of PNG (Central Bank)

 Introduction

 Section 49B of the Superannuation Act requires all ASFs to subscribe to an industry funded complaints resolution mechanism to the satisfaction of the Central Bank. 

The ASFPNG executive established a working committee the on 4^th June 2002 with the primary role of discussing and recommending a formal complaints mechanism in line with Section 49B of the Superannuation Act 2000.

 The working committee on the Complaints Resolution mechanism comprised a representative from two of the major funds, POSF and NASFUND, other smaller funds, service providers, BPNG and Treasury Department. Members of the current working committee are;

 ·         Ian Tarutia               Chairman, NASFUND

·         Leon Buskens         POSF

·         Kible Bonga             FPSF

·         Puri Mao                 PEA Super Fund

·         Chris Hagan            Aon Consulting (PNG)

·         Syd Yates               Kina Securities Ltd

·         Andrew Oaeke         Department of Treasury (STF)

·         Tom Milamala          Bank of PNG

 It is not expected that the current working committee members will become the Complaint Committee however it is recommended that the composition of the Complaints Committee must include a representative from the two largest funds i.e POSF, NASFUND, and a representative each from a smaller fund, a service provider, Department of Treasury and the Central Bank.  

 In the deliberation of a suitable model the common consensus was that the ASFA model provided a suitable reference to work from given the relatively smaller size of the PNG superannuation industry. The model has been simplified for this purpose.

 Specific focus has been attentioned on individual ASFs to have in place internal compliant resolution mechanisms to resolve what we believe in these early days will be 90 to 95% of the common complaints received. The idea is to be proactive rather than reactive. The Complaints Committee may hardly receive any complaints at this embryonic stage.     

 The Central Bank will not feature as part of the formal complaint process. At this juncture a Central Bank representative will sit as part of the Complaints Committee  

 B. The Complaints Resolution Process Model

 The proposed model has been developed using the Australian Superannuation Fund Association Complaints Guidelines as a reference. 

The Two Main Stages

•  An ASF / Appointed service provider must respond within 7 days acknowledging receipt of the formal complaint.
• The ASF must resolve the complaint within 90 days. If an impasse is reached sooner and the complaint cannot be resolved the complainant can refer the matter to the Complaints Committee.  
• The Complaints Committee must respond to the complainant within 30 days. (The process is described later in detail)
• The Central Bank will not involve itself in the resolution of complaints as the Complaints Committee is the last determination point in the process. It however must be notified of any complaints regarding prudential concerns.
• The decision by the Complaints Committee is final and is binding on all parties. If a party is aggrieved by the decision it may appeal in a court of law.     

C. COMPLIANTS HANDLING PROCESS

 Who can make a complaint to the CC?

 ·         Contributing and/or former member of an ASF

·         Beneficiaries of members, potential beneficiaries or their appointed legal representative.

·         Trustees / Directors

·         Employers

·         Non members

 The Process in Making a Complaint – Starting at the ASF

 In making a complaint, the source complaints go straight to the ASF concerned to ensure there is minimum delays and the correct procedure is followed.

 As a matter of best practice each ASF must have in place their own internal mechanisms for handling all quiries and complaints in an effective and timely manner.

 In the PNG superannuation environment, a tiered approach of handling inquiries and complaints is likely to be the most effective means, and generally fits well with the outsourced requirements of fund administration and investment management. Such a structure we believe enables simple inquiries and complaints to be satisfied or resolved quickly by front line staff, while more complex matters can be dealt with by more senior, specialist staff or management.

 The tiered structure we propose entails:

 1. A Front Line Client Service Function (e.g. call centre or counter service)

 This is the first port of call for all inquiries, and non‑written, informal complaints. This function is likely to be performed by the ASF itself or its appointed administration provider and should be able to handle all but the most complex inquiries.

 The client service function should also be able to assess the nature of any complaints received in person or by phone, and either deal with such complaints if within their authority, or advise the complainant that the matter needs to be referred to the complaints officer for investigation. Similarly, if an inquiry turns into a complaint, the client service section will need to advise the complaints officer / section accordingly.

 A log and register of inquiries must be maintained as monitor of the service provided by the fund, to track how, where and when a inquiry has been resolved and to make improvements where necessary.

 2. A Complaints Officer or Unit.

 Either employed by the ASF itself or its appointed administrator. The complaints function would be responsible for the investigation of more complex complaints, which cannot be resolved by the client service functions, as well as any complaints, which have been addressed directly to the nominated complaints officer by the complainant.

 The complaints officer or manager should be able to conduct an independent investigation of the subject matter of any complaints, with the authority to direct the ASF management to take appropriate corrective action where possible or relevant. Where the complaints officer is employed by the ASF, the fund's inquiries and complaints procedures should also include contingency arrangements in case the complaints officer becomes the subject of a complaint. This may require the nomination of an alternate complaints officer for these circumstances, e g. a senior fund executive.

 Where the complaint relates to a trustee decision that requires trustee review, the complaints officer needs to ensure that the complainant, the ASF or its appointed administrator if the case may be and any other third parties who have been involved in the original decision provide all relevant information for submission and review by the trustee. The complaints officer may need to determine if any additional information is required, either from the complainant, or third parties, to assist the trustees in reviewing the complaint.

The operation of the inquiries and complaints function should be monitored by the Trustee Board and/or relevant trustee staff, such as the CEO and compliance officer, both from a compliance and efficacy viewpoint.

 The recording and monitoring of complaints, to ensure that they are dealt within the statutory time limit, is an essential component of the complaints function, as is identification of complaints that are potential disputes. The trustee board itself should review such matters.

 3. Frontline Staff Training, Resource, Empowerment

 To achieve an effective internal system frontline staff should be adequately, trained, resourced and empowered. As the first point of contact with an ASF if a person is satisfied with the way their concerns is addressed, it is less likely they will pursue a complaint.

 Staff empowerment requires the following:

 •    clear and documented guidelines for staff dealing with complaints about matters such as the kind of redress that can be offered in different situations and who is authorised to approve such remedies;

 •     Clear lines of authority to enable more difficult complaints or clients to be quickly referred and dealt with at the appropriate level;

 •     Training in complaints handling including communication and interpersonal skills;

 •     IT support and up to date information about fund policies and procedures;

 •    Information about current issues which may result in high levels of inquiries, or new types of inquiries; and

 •    A supportive environment that values and trusts staff dealing with inquiries and complaints.

 Clearly not all complaints can be dealt with and resolved at the front end. Some matters are too complex, may require extensive investigation, or may involve review of trustee decisions (whether made by a delegate or the trustee board itself.) Such complaints ‑, which have the potential to become ‘disputes’ if unresolved, need to be identified early and referred by the organisation to the appropriate complaints officer appointed for this purpose. The complainant needs to be kept informed of such internal referrals.

 Types of Complaints

• the decisions and conduct of Trustees of Superannuation Funds and Approved Super Funds, (ASF) including the conduct and decisions of people acting on behalf of the Trustee.
• any other issues and matters that are perceived as not in the interest of the members or the industry.

 Before a complainant makes a complaint to the Committee, they must first make a complaint to their Fund under its own internal arrangements for dealing with complaints.  If the complainant is not satisfied with the response or does not receive a response within 90 days, a complaint can be lodged to the Complaints Committee.

 Complaints lodged with the Complaints Committee

 There are three stages in dealing with a complaint:

 1.         Receipt of Complaint & Inquiry by Committee

            The Committee contacts the relevant parties and inquiries into the complaint.

 2.                   Conciliation

 The Committee will try to assist with the parties to reach an agreed settlement.

 3.                   The Review Meeting

If a complaint cannot be resolved, it will proceed to a Review meeting where the Committee will consider submissions and make a determination.

It is possible that the Determination of the Committee at Review could be appealed to a competent court of law.

 There are also some circumstances in which the Committee may decide not to deal with a complaint any further.  In these circumstances, the Committee will write to the complainant advising of its intention to withdraw from the process.

Complaint Handling Procedures. 

1.                   Receipt of Complaint & Inquiry by the Committee

 The Chairman/Secretariat of the Committee first examines the complaint to ensure it is a matter that the Committee can deal with.  The Committee may need to seek further information from the complainant to establish if this is the case.

 If the Committee cannot deal with the complaint, it will write back to the complainant explaining why it cannot do so within 7 days of receiving the complaint.

 If the Committee can deal with a complainant, it will acknowledge receipt of the complainant within seven days.  The Committee is also required to send notice of the complainant and details about it to the Fund Trustee or Service Providers.

 The complainant must provide all relevant information and copies of all documents relating to the complaint. The Committee may request for this if not provided.

 This request will generally be made to the Fund Trustee or Service Providers, although other persons may also be asked to provide relevant information.

 The Fund Trustee and Service Provider is obliged by law under BPNG Regulations to provide all relevant information to the Committee.

 If the complaint is about the distribution of a death benefit, the Committee will normally seek to joint any other person who could possibly be a beneficiary.

 When the Committee has received the information from the relevant parties, it will seek to complete its inquiry into the complaint.  This may involve seeking more information from one or more of the parties.  The Committee may also need to seek information from someone else, such as a member’s former employer.  The Committee has the power to require people to provide it with information and documents. The length of time it will take the Committee to complete its inquiry will vary from one case to another depending on the complexity of the matter and accessibility in obtaining information.

 When the Inquiry is completed, the Committee will consider whether it should proceed with the complaint.  The Committee may decide to treat the complaint as withdrawn, if any of the following apply:-

• the complainant fails to reply to any correspondence or phone calls over a significant time;
• more than 3 months have elapsed since the Fund Trustee/Service Provider decision;
• the complainant is considered to be trivial, vexatious, misconceived or lacking in substance; or
•  the subject matter of the complaint has been, or is likely to be, dealt with by another body or statutory authority, or has already been dealt with by the Committee itself.

If the Committee decides to withdraw a complaint, it is required to write to all parties to explain why it has decided to do so.  It will give the complainant an opportunity to respond before it makes a final decision.

 If the Inquiry is completed and the complaint is not withdrawn, the Committee will proceed to try and resolve the complaint by conciliation.

2.                   Conciliation

 Conciliation is a process, which attempts to get the parties to a complaint (the complainant, the Trustee/Service Providers, other joined parties) to resolve the complaint, by mutual agreement.

 Sometimes, a complaint can be resolved without the need for a conference.  In most cases however, the Committee contacts all the parties to establish when they would be available for a conciliation conference.  The Committee will then set a date for the conference and notify all the parties.  The parties will be provided with an agenda for the conference and there may be an exchange of relevant information held on the Committee’s file.

 The conciliation conference may be conducted with all the parties in one room, by videoconference or by teleconference.

 There are safeguards built into the process to ensure:

• the proceedings are confidential – if the complaint is not settled by Conciliation, nothing said or done at the conference can be divulged to the Review meeting or in another forum unless by agreement of all the parties or by force of law;
• the proceedings are informal  -  it is not bound by rules of evidence; and
•   there are no particular requirements as to its structure.

The Conciliation committee shall have in-house guide as to how it conducts its conciliation meetings. This guideline shall also be made available to all parties called before the CC for this purpose.

  3.                   The Review Meeting

 If a complaint cannot be resolved by inquiry/conciliation, and has not been withdrawn by the Committee, it proceeds to the Review stage.  This means the Committee will meet to determine the outcome of the complaint.  The Review Committee will consist of at least three members.

 The process is:

1. The parties receive a “Notice of Review Meeting” together with a copy of documents obtained by the Committee.
2. They have an opportunity to provide a written submission for consideration by the Review Meeting of the Committee.
3. They will receive a copy of any submissions provided to the Complaints Committee by the other parties to the complaint and will be invited to comment on those submissions.
4. The Review Committee will meet to determine the complaint.
5.  The parties will receive a copy of the Review Committee’s decision in due course.

 Attendance at a Review Meeting

 Parties do not have to attend Review Meetings. The Review Meeting is normally conducted on the basis of the papers on the Complaints Committee file.

 In exceptional circumstances, a request can be made to allow an oral hearing.

 Information Provided to Parties

 A bundle of documents is enclosed with the Notice of Review Meeting to make sure that everyone knows what information the other parties have provided to the CC.  This ensures that the CC makes its decision using information that all parties have seen and all parties have had the opportunity to comment on.

 These documents include:

•  copies of the material provided to the CC by the other parties to this complaint;
•  a copy of the trust deed (for the parties who do not have a copy) which sets out the powers and duties of the Trustee and provisions relevant to the complainant; and
•  a copy of any relevant contracts.

 A party is free to show the documents to any person who is assisting them with preparing their submission.  Exchange of documents between parties is for the purposes of the Review Meeting only and these documents must not be disclosed to any other person for any other purpose.

 If a complainant requests an outside or appointed representative, they must write to the CC and include the reasons to be represented.  The CC will then advise as to whether the request for representation is granted.

 A written submission gives each party the opportunity to:-

•  comment on the material provided by the CC; and/or
•  summarise the case.

 No party is obliged to make a submission.

 Can a Party comment on the other Submissions?

 Yes.  Each party will receive a copy of the submissions provided to the CC by the other parties to the complaint.  They then have an opportunity to respond to those submissions by the due date.

 The Review Meeting and Determination

 The CC as constituted by at least four (4) members, will hold a meeting at which it will review the Fund Trustee/Service Provider’s disputed decision. The CC will have available to it all the information the parties have provided to the CC except material which was restricted to the conciliation conference.  The CC is able to consider evidence that was not available when then the Fund Trustee/Service Provider made its original decision.

 The CC will either:

• affirm the decision;
• remit the matter to the Fund Trustee/Service Provider or other decision maker for reconsideration of its decision in accordance with the directions of the CC;
• vary the decision; or

 set aside the decision and substitute its own.

 If the CC is satisfied that the decision in its operation in relation to the complainant was fair and reasonable in all the circumstances, then the CC must affirm the decision.  (In death benefit reviews, other persons with an interest who have been joined as a party must be considered.)

 Implementation of Determinations

 The Fund Trustee/Service Provider must implement the decision of the CC.  If the Fund Trustee/Service Provider fails to do so, the Bank of Papua New Guinea can use its extensive powers, on the complainant’s behalf, to enforce the CC’s decision. 

 It will take a maximum of 4 weeks for the decision and reasons to be written and signed by the members of the CC.

 4.                   Appeals

 The CC’s decision may be overturned on a question of law.  In this instance a complainant may seek redress in a competent court of law. An appeal must be lodged no later than the 28^th day after the day on which the CC’s determination is received.

 Appeals to these bodies do not stop the CC from implementing its decision, unless the Court makes an order stopping the operation of the CC’s decision.

 5.                   Withdrawing a Complaint

 A complainant can withdraw the complaint from the CC at any time, simply by writing to the CC advising of the decision to withdraw the complaint.

 D.      Composition of Complaints Committee

 It is proposed that the CC will be a permanent committee of the ASFPNG and will comprise of a representative from the two largest funds, POSF and NASFUND, two members from the smaller funds, a representative from a service provider and one member each from the Central Bank and the Department of Treasury in ex officio roles. An independent person appointed by the ASFPNG executives is to chair the committee. In the immediate short term, the CC will administer its activities through the Chairman of the working committee’s office. It may be a requirement in the long term, for a full time secretariat to maintain the daily flow of queries and complaints before being referred to the CC for formal decisions.

 Funding of the secretariat will come from ASFs affiliated to the ASFPNG. The main body should subsidize costs of running the office, which is the ASFPNG.

 Recommendations

 That the ASFPNG;

i.                     Accept the proposed guidelines as an interim mechanism and to be reviewed in 12 months.

ii.                   Endorse the structure of the Complaints Committee as proposed.

iii.                  approve that funding of the Complaints Committee be met from affiliated ASFs to ASFPNG;