Finance Finance News Catherine Brenner becomes the second head to roll at AMP
Updated:

Catherine Brenner becomes the second head to roll at AMP

AMP under pressure.
AMP CEO Craig Meller stepped down. Now the pressure is on Catherine Brenner to do likewise. Photo: AAP
Share
Twitter Facebook Reddit Pinterest Email

AMP chairwoman Catherine Brenner has resigned following damning evidence at the banking royal commission of misconduct by the company’s staff.

In a statement, the financial services company on Monday morning said directors will take a 25 per cent pay cut for the remainder of 2018 as a result of the issues raised at the commission.

It is still considering “employment and remuneration consequences” for those staff directly involved in charging fees for no services.

Mike Wilkins has been appointed as executive chair of the financial services company, effective immediately.

Brian Salter, the group general counsel and company secretary, will also be leaving AMP, the company said in a statement.

The banking royal commission heard on Friday that AMP could face criminal penalties for misleading the corporate regulator.

“Through AMP’s dealings with ASIC regarding the extent and nature of its fee-for-no-service conduct, AMP adopted an attitude toward the regulator that was not forthright or honest, and demonstrated a deliberate attempt to mislead,” counsel assisting the inquiry Rowena Orr, QC, said.

In the statement announcing the chairwoman’s resignation, AMP said the company’s board is “satisfied” that Ms Brenner and former chief executive Craig Meller, who resigned earlier this month, “did not act inappropriately in relation to the preparation of the Clayton Utz report”.

AMP was the first institution to be questioned by the commission over the fee-for-no-service scandal, which also involved the four major banks.

During questioning, AMP’s group executive for advice, Anthony ‘Jack’ Regan, admitted to the commission that the company had misled ASIC by presenting fee-for-no-service as a mistake, when there was a deliberate policy to charge customers fees for 90 days even when they were in a pool that received no advice services.

It also emerged during questioning that the company’s board ordered changes to an “independent review” of the fee-for-no-service scandal being performed by law firm Clayton Utz, and that those changes were made.

-ABC

Comments
View Comments