Bank not obliged to check validity of blind customer’s instructions

Categories:

Instructions not followed, Investment, Bank decisions,

Summary:

In August 2025, Cameron complained that the bank had terminated his term deposit early and transferred the money to his transaction accounts without his knowledge or instructions. He said the bank knew he was blind but did not notify him that it closed his term deposit investment, and nor did it have any safeguards in place to prevent this from happening. He also complained about delays, inaccessible communication and how the bank handled his complaint.

The bank said the term deposit was closed in accordance with instructions using internet banking credentials linked to his account. It said it was required to act on those instructions and did not provide separate notice of closures initiated by customers.

Published:

June 2026

Our investigation

The bank’s records showed that Cameron’s banking credentials were used to instruct the bank to close his term deposit. The bank was therefore required to act on those instructions. We found the bank was not required to verify the instructions with Cameron or notify him after they had been carried out.

We also found the bank was not required to tell Cameron it had acted on his instructions because he was blind. In our view, the bank’s standard practice of providing transaction information through statements was sufficient, particularly as Cameron had not asked the bank to communicate with him in a specific format.

However, the bank delayed investigating the complaint, did not respond to all aspects of Cameron’s complaint, and failed to provide information in an accessible format. We raised our concerns about its complaint handling.

The bank acknowledged shortcomings in its communication and complaint handling and offered Cameron $1,700 in compensation.