RG 271 Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR): Resolving Complaints with Evidence and Speed
Understanding RG 271
RG 271 sets binding standards for Internal Dispute Resolution (IDR) across Australian financial services. It prescribes timeframes (including shorter maximum response times for most complaints), content requirements for written IDR responses, and systems and governance to ensure fair, consistent outcomes. For banks, insurers, super trustees, platforms, brokers and lenders, RG 271 connects directly to AFCA external dispute resolution, DDO product governance signals, RG 78 reportable situations, and vulnerable-customer treatment.
Why RG 271 Matters
Effective IDR protects customers and reduces remediation and enforcement risk. Strong execution:
Resolves issues quickly, reducing AFCA escalations and compensation exposure.
Generates decision-useful MI for boards and product governance (DDO), surfacing root causes early.
Demonstrates fairness and accessibility, especially for vulnerable customers and diverse channels.
Builds regulatory confidence through complete, timely, and well-evidenced responses.
Key Challenges Facing Firms
Timeframe discipline: consistently meeting compressed response deadlines across high-volume peaks.
Decision quality: ensuring responses are reasoned, plain-English and tailored to the complaint, with remedy logic that stands up to AFCA scrutiny.
Data lineage: stitching complaints data to DDO, breach reporting (RG 78), remediation and conduct MI without duplication or gaps.
Root-cause management: converting themes into fixes with owners, due dates and validation.
Channel consistency: aligning branch, call, chat, email, app and social media intake with one workflow.
Vulnerable customers: practical accessibility, support and escalation pathways that are auditable.
Third-party oversight: ensuring ARs, brokers, TPAs and outsourced providers meet your IDR standards.
How OCG Can Help
Oceanic Consulting Group (OCG) makes IDR practical, defensible and measurable.
IDR operating model & playbooks: roles/RACI, triage rules, time-clock logic, templates and quality thresholds.
Response quality uplift: structured reasoning models, remedy matrices, vulnerable-customer guidance, and coaching for case handlers.
Data & MI design: single source of truth that links to DDO significant-dealing signals, RG 78, remediation, and product change governance.
Quality assurance & effectiveness testing: sampling frameworks, outcome testing, speech/text analytics, and calibration routines.
Technology enablement: case-management requirements, workflow SLAs, clock/timer controls, and board-ready dashboards.
Independent reviews: readiness assessments, AFCA back-book analysis, and uplift programmes with tracked benefits.
FAQs
What makes an IDR response “good”?
It addresses all issues raised, cites clear findings and reasons, sets out remedy or next steps, and explains AFCA options, in accessible language.
How should IDR connect to DDO and RG 78?
Complaints themes feed TMD reviews and distribution controls (DDO). Systemic or significant issues may trigger reportable situations under RG 78 and targeted remediation.
How do we evidence fairness?
Use decision checklists, comparable case libraries, vulnerable-customer controls, and QA artefacts. Track reversal rates and AFCA outcomes to validate fairness.
Strengthen Your IDR Framework
Work with OCG’s Complaints & Conduct Specialists
Don’t let complaints escalate into costly disputes. Contact OCG to design IDR playbooks, uplift response quality, and build data and MI that prove fairness, timeliness and effective remediation.
