I have been contacted by several newsagents over the last two days who have found it particularly difficult to cancel direct debit arrangements for their now useless Bill Express equipment. In each case their bank, the ANZ, has refused to act on their written instructions. My understanding is that this is a breach of the Australian Bankers’ Association Code of Banking Practice. It will be interesting to see whether a formal complaint to the Financial Ombudsman Service can resolve the disputes.

To balance this I would note that several other newsagents have been refunded amounts taken by their bank after they canceled their direct debit arrangements.

Further to my post on Friday, Mark Hawthorne reports in The Age today the details of what was presented to the committee of creditors at Friday’s meeting.

I received a call yesterday from a newsagent who had not stopped the direct debit arrangement for the Bill Express equipment because of advice from the Australian Newsagents’ Federation. She rang me after reading the advice from the ANF three days ago that newsagents suspend the direct debit arrangement. She was in tears at what she calls at least two months of “lost” payments. As she explained, the two months payments was more than a year of ANF membership fees.

Her story is not uncommon. She went into Bill Express on the advice of the ANF and, in her words, has always done what they told her.

In a business with annual sales of $345,000 and a net profit of under $20,000, the $6,534 a year in Bill Express equipment rental fees for no return will be a huge cost. This is why she was in tears. As she put it to me, had she ignored the advice of the ANF and listened to other newsagents she would have stopped the direct debit earlier and saved, maybe, two months of payments.

My caller told me that when she spoke to the ANF twice about this they were adamant that she should continue to pay for the equipment and that they had legal advice newsagents should do this. She tried called the ANF Friday but could not speak to anyone who knew why they changed position.

My understanding is that the ANF did not receive any different legal advice before it revised the advice it provided newsagents on Thursday to “suspend” direct debit arrangements for the Bill Express equipment. I hope I am wrong and that the Board issued the changed advice based on new legal advice and not political expediency.

While some on the Board will not like this blog post – it is more of the “third party commentary” they criticised on Thursday – the questions I post warrant answers. Did the Board get new advice? If so, what are the details? If not, why did the Board take the u-turn on Thursday and why not sooner? It would appear that the ANF Board has misjudged the mood of their constituency on the Bill Express matter.  The Chairman said most West Australian newsagents were not affected when he spoke to a group of newsagents in Melbourne earlier this week.

I know I should welcome the u-turn by the ANF and focus on next steps. The call I received yesterday does not permit that. While I get calls about Bill Express daily, yesterday’s was highly emotional. The cost could lead to the owner shutting the business and walking away such is her trauma of the financial situation and being let down. I felt helpless in listening to her situation.

I have told people at the ANF and at VANA of these calls.  Others have told them too.  Many newsagents cannot afford to have to pay for equipment from which they can achieve no return.  They feel let down for having been told that Bill Express by organisations they trust only to find that those organisations had not done their homework.

Hopefully the ANF will better explain its advice this week and ensure that its staff are well equipped to explain this to callers. Newsagents need certainty. They also need to know that their national association has empathy for their position.

What has happened to newsagents over the last few months with Bill Express is a crime. Newsagents need to see justice pursued by ASIC, the ACCC, the Administrator and any other avenue so that the closure which is important to victims of crime can be achieved.