TCP Code Credit Assessment Non-Compliance Penalties
Definition
ACMA's shadow shopping study revealed gaps in telcos' credit assessment practices under TCP Code, prompting formal compliance assessments, investigations, and enforcement, resulting in potential fines.
Key Findings
- Financial Impact: AUD 10,000+ per breach in ACMA enforcement penalties; typical investigation costs 20-50 hours/legal fees per incident
- Frequency: Ongoing, with ACMA priorities for 2019-21 extended
- Root Cause: Manual credit checks failing to meet external reporting or internal history review requirements
Why This Matters
The Pitch: Wireless services providers in Australia waste AUD 50,000+ annually on TCP Code compliance failures. Automation of credit scoring and deposit management eliminates this risk.
Affected Stakeholders
Compliance Officer, Customer Onboarding Manager, Credit Risk Analyst
Deep Analysis (Premium)
Financial Impact
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Current Workarounds
Financial data and detailed analysis available with full access. Unlock to see exact figures, evidence sources, and actionable insights.
Get Solutions for This Problem
Full report with actionable solutions
- Solutions for this specific pain
- Solutions for all 15 industry pains
- Where to find first clients
- Pricing & launch costs
Methodology & Sources
Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.
Related Business Risks
Credit Check Failures Causing Lost Sales
Fehlkalkulierte Händlerprovisionen durch komplexe Tarif- und Rabattstrukturen
Hoher manueller Abrechnungsaufwand für Händlerprovisionen
Verzögerte Händlerauszahlungen führen zu Umsatz- und Cashflow-Nachteilen
Provisionsbetrug und Missbrauch durch unzureichende Prüfmechanismen
Fehlerhafte steuerliche Behandlung von Händlerprovisionen (GST, BAS, Einkommensteuer)
Request Deep Analysis
🇦🇺 Be first to access this market's intelligence