The Australian Financial Complaints Authority received 7706 superannuation complaints in the 2025 calendar year, a 30 per cent increase on 2024, and it says the numbers are on track to rise again this year. 

Based on first-quarter 2026 data, AFCA projected it would receive well over 8000 superannuation complaints by the end of the current financial year. 

Heather Gray, who in mid-May steps down as lead ombudsman for superannuation, said told the AFCA Member Forum that the complaints authority received 2079 complaints in the first quarter. 

“[That’s] a significant increase from last financial year, and we’re projecting that we’ll finish the year with well over 8000 superannuation complaints. That’s a more than 30 per cent increase from the last year.” 

Around two-thirds of all complaints in 2025 concerned administration and service, and issues “just to do with the management of superannuation accounts”, Gray said.

Three of the top five issues related to member service problems, reflecting, broadly, issues that funds have experienced with services from an administration sector groaning in some cases under the weight of outdated technology and an underinvestment in renewing that technology in the face of fierce downward pressure on admin expenses by funds themselves. 

HESTA said a decision last year to switch administration providers to Grow Inc was spurred by “the critical importance of modern, secure and future-ready technology to member services over the long-term”. But despite the best intentions, the transfer, described by the fund as the largest technology project in its nearly 40-year history, blew up in its face.  

The fund admitted after the fact that the transfer “didn’t come off perfectly”. In fact, members were locked out of their accounts for seven weeks between April and June 2025. 

AFCA’s datacube shows that between 1 July 2025 and 28 February this year it received 536 complaints about HESTA relating to “superannuation account” issues. It is not clear, however, how many complaints were sparked directly by the mid-year limited service period. 

But in any case, following the transfer APRA imposed licence conditions on HESTA, a move characterised as counterproductive at a time when regulators were very publicly demanding that funds improve their operational infrastructure.  

HESTA later acquired a minority stake in Grow, which it said would “support and enhance the administration services provided to our members, including the development of more personalised experiences.” 

Elsewhere, delays in claims handling accounted for about 17 per cent of complaints received by AFCA in 2025. The rate in previous years has been as high as 24 to 25 per cent and had appeared to be improving, but “the number of them is higher than the previous year,” Gray said. 

“And we’re seeing that while those types of complaints were trending down, now, unfortunately, they’re starting to trend up again.” 

Gray identified denial of claim as an increasingly contentious issue, which she said was being driven significantly by changes to how funds handle mental health claims. 

However, only 5 per cent of complaints closed by AFCA required it to issue a formal determination, a figure Gray said has been consistent for a number of years. 

In the 2025 calendar year, around 45 per cent of complaints closed at registration and referral, before even progressing to case management. 

“It’s a much better experience to see their complaint just being dealt with very quickly,” Gray said. “Better for the complainant, but also better for you and better for us.” 

Dealing with unreasonable complaints 

Senior ombudsman Ben Norman and senior manager Rhys Lloyd told the forum that in cases where a complaint or a complainant is unreasonable, the problem is not necessarily difficult people but specific conduct that makes complaints unsafe or unworkable. Norman said AFCA’s approach is to address the behaviour, not characterise the individual. 

“We prefer to focus on the language of ‘this conduct is unreasonable’ rather than ‘this person is unreasonable’,” Norman said.  

“You might have empathy for someone who’s in a difficult situation, but you can still set clear bounds as well.” 

He said responses should be proportionate. A single instance of swearing in frustration during an interaction with a fund is not the same as repeated abuse, threats, or refusal to engage. 

“Better practice involves starting with the least restrictive response, setting expectations, reminding people of respectful communication standards and redirecting or pausing discussions if required,” Norman said.  

“It’s appropriate to escalate when the conduct is repeated, the conduct escalates, or the safety or integrity of the process is undermined.” 

Gray said AFCA applies the same philosophy to its own staff. The starting point was a warning; then a restriction to written communication; then a requirement to appoint a representative; and, in extreme cases, exclusion and closure of the complaint. Staff safety, she said, was not negotiable. 

Lloyd said funds should contact their caseworker as soon as they encounter unreasonable conduct, not wait for the case to progress. 

“Let us know about the behaviour you are experiencing and what plans you have in place,” Lloyd said.  

“We really put the safety of our people first, and that also includes how safe our customers and members feel engaging with each other as well.” 

De-escalating confrontation 

Gray said a fund’s internal dispute resolution (IDR) should be an effective first-line of defence. A comprehensive review by the IDR team and detailed written responses frequently head off the need for AFCA involvement altogether. 

IDR teams need authority to make commercial settlements – such as modest compensation, an apology or an explanation – even if a fund has not made a clear and obvious mistake. 

“There are often things that people are looking for at that stage as the complainant that maybe they don’t get, because the complaints team can say, when we work our way through this, there wasn’t actually an error,” Gray said.  

“From our perspective, when we see those complaints coming to us over a relatively small amount of money or a relatively minor thing that’s happened, if there had been that opportunity with people in power just to make those commercial settlements… that would probably be quite impactful.” 

Lloyd said the funds that move complaints through case management fastest stayed in contact with complainants after lodging at AFCA, provided complete documentation at the outset, and sent conciliation delegates with actual authority to settle. 

“It’s those complaints where we don’t have good communication between the parties, or we’re not getting the right information, that can become aged and take a long time for us to resolve and become quite complex,” he said. 

“So best practice, absolutely, is [to collect] as much information as early as possible, and just keep communicating with us and with the consumer as well.”