Posts tagged: Press Release

2 December 2025

As festive season promotions intensify nationwide, the National Financial Ombud (NFO) South Africa is urging consumers to exercise caution with Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) offers.

While heavily marketed as simple, convenient, and interest-free payment options, BNPL arrangements carry hidden risks. In an economy where many households are already burdened by debt, these schemes can deepen financial vulnerability and strain.

BNPL falls outside the protection of the NCA

BNPL products are not covered by the National Credit Act (NCA). That means the usual consumer protections such as affordability checks, clear cost disclosures, and formal dispute resolution channels simply don’t apply. Yet despite this regulatory gap, BNPL is spreading fast across South Africa, often leaving consumers exposed without fully grasping the risks.

Nerosha Maseti, Lead Ombud for Banking and Credit within the NFO, warns the explosive growth of BNPL, paired with weak regulatory guardrails, is a recipe for trouble. Vulnerable consumers risk slipping deeper into debt as BNPL spreads unchecked.

“Buy Now Pay Later may appear harmless or even helpful, but in reality, it operates as a form of unregulated short-term credit.

“When payments are missed, fees escalate. Budgets collapse. What starts as a convenient purchase can turn into a serious financial setback, particularly because consumers do not benefit from the usual protections provided under the NCA,” said Maseti.

Maseti warns that BNPL often stacks on top of existing financial commitments, intensifying debt pressure.

“BNPL doesn’t make items cheaper; it simply postpones payment. In reality, it creates a fresh debt obligation at a time when many households are already battling loan repayments, store accounts, and monthly bills. Without affordability checks, the danger of slipping into over-indebtedness rises sharply.

BNPL Debt Creates Financial Burden Heading Into January

Maseti said most BNPL agreements entered into during December require repayment in the first months of the new year.

“January and February are already challenging months for many families due to school-related expenses, annual increases in debit orders and the effect of festive season spending on disposable income.

“By adding BNPL instalments onto existing credit commitments can quickly disrupt a consumer’s entire financial ecosystem. This may lead to arrears, penalty fees, negative credit listings and, in some cases, formal debt collection action early in 2026,” she warned.

While South Africa continues to experience elevated levels of over-indebtedness, BNPL adds an additional layer of risk because these arrangements often do not appear on conventional credit profiles. Without credit-worthiness checks, consumers may, therefore, take out multiple BNPL deals across various retailers, underestimating how quickly the instalments accumulate.

Other key concerns include low initial instalments that mask the actual cost of repayment, the absence of affordability checks and the growing trend of consumers using BNPL to cover everyday essentials instead of discretionary purchases.

“Many consumers assume BNPL is not real debt because it is easy to access. In practice, it can significantly undermine their ability to keep up with essential credit obligations such as mortgage payments, vehicle finance, and personal loans. We are concerned about the potential for BNPL to become a systemic contributor to rising over-indebtedness,” a worried Maseti said.

Consumers’ Responsibility When Accessing BNPL

Because BNPL is not protected under the NCA, the responsibility to assess affordability rests entirely with consumers. Before entering a BNPL arrangement, the NFO encourages consumers to consider whether the instalments can be fully repaid and on time next year and whether new obligations will compromise the ability to meet existing credit commitments.

Maseti said consumers should also avoid using BNPL for everyday necessities such as groceries, school supplies, and household bills, and should be cautious of taking multiple BNPL agreements from different retailers at the same time.

A Call For Consumer Self-Protection

Since BNPL is marketed as a convenient and sometimes interest-free solution, the absence of legal protection raises the risk of harm.

“We urge South Africans to think ahead. If an item cannot comfortably fit into your current budget, using Buy Now Pay Later does not make it more affordable. It simply shifts the repayment into a new year that may already be financially demanding.

“Consumers who feel overwhelmed by debt, or who are uncertain about their financial obligations, are encouraged to contact their credit providers as soon as possible failing which they may contact the NFO for guidance. The earlier consumers seek help, the more options they have to prevent long-term financial harm,” said Maseti.

Tips For Consumers This Festive Season:

The NFO offers the following steps to help South Africans safeguard their financial wellbeing and avoid over-indebtedness in 2026:

• Be honest about affordability: Assess whether you can repay the full amount in the coming months without compromising essential expenses. If you are already struggling to meet current commitments, avoid BNPL entirely.

• Read and understand the terms: Before accepting a BNPL offer, make sure you know what happens if you miss a payment, incur a late fee or fall behind. If the terms are unclear, treat that as a warning sign.

Avoid taking multiple BNPL deals: Different retailers may offer separate BNPL options. Stacking several of these agreements can quickly become unmanageable.

• Do not use BNPL for essential items: BNPL is unsuitable for groceries, school stationery, transport, rent or medical needs. These expenses signal that your budget is already under strain.

• Track your payment dates carefully: Record all instalment dates in a diary, budgeting app, or digital calendar to avoid missed payments during the financially pressured months of January and February.

Ends

24 November 2025

Party season is here, but don’t let it end in disaster: driving under the influence could wreck your future and your finances. This holiday, the biggest hangover isn’t alcohol; it’s losing your insurance cover.

The Non-life Insurance Division of the National Financial Ombud Scheme (NFO) has already, this year, seen a surge in complaints where motor vehicle accident claims have been rejected because the driver was found to be under the influence of alcohol or another intoxicating substance.

The biggest misconception amongst complainants is that the insurance company may only rely on the outcome of blood/alcohol or breathalyzer tests to reject a claim, says Edite Teixeira-Mckinon, Lead Ombud of the Non-life Insurance Division of the NFO.

She said a claim against the insurer is a civil claim, and, unlike in criminal proceedings, the insurer need only demonstrate on a balance of probabilities that the insured drove the vehicle whilst under the influence of an intoxicating substance. What this means is that the insurer has a lighter burden of proof than the State in criminal matters and the insurer may rely on other evidence to reject a claim on this basis.

What constitutes other evidence differs from case to case. Some examples of the evidence that the Non-life Insurance Division has considered include:

• Evidence of witnesses at the accident scene describing the driver’s appearance and conduct which are consistent with that of someone who is under the influence of an intoxicating substance.
• The driver’s whereabouts prior to the accident, for example, at a shebeen, pub, party, braai etc. where alcohol was consumed.
• The vehicle’s tracking data and cell phone records disputing the driver’s version regarding their whereabouts prior to the accident.
• Bank statements confirming that the driver purchased alcohol prior to the accident.
• Video footage of the driver consuming an intoxicating substance prior to the accident.
• Evidence of paramedics and doctors who attended to the driver after the accident.
• The driver unlawfully left the scene of the accident.
• The time and day of the accident.
• The way the accident took place.
• The driver’s own evidence regarding the amount of alcohol consumed prior to the accident.

In a recent matter dealt with by the Non-life Insurance Division, the complainant disputed the insurer’s rejection of a claim for accident damage to his vehicle on the grounds that his son, being the incident driver, was under the influence of alcohol.

The driver’s version of the incident was that the accident took place shortly after 1am when, whilst trying to overtake a third party, the third party moved into his lane causing him to collide with the third party and losing control of the vehicle.

During the investigation of the claim, the driver said that on the day of the accident he met a friend at the shooting range. After their shooting practice, they each consumed a draught beer. Thereafter, the complainant’s son fetched his girlfriend from work, and they went to a café where they had a pizza and a milkshake. When leaving the café, at about 1am, the complainant’s son was involved in an altercation with the car guards during which he was stabbed.

To reject the claim, the insurer relied on the tow truck driver’s evidence which stated that the driver was severely under the influence of alcohol. In addition, the insurer obtained the son’s medical reports which included notes compiled by the doctor who first treated him when he arrived at the hospital in an ambulance.

The doctor noted that the complainant’s son seemed agitated but oriented and under “EtOH influence” – EtOH is the chemical abbreviation for ethanol, the type of alcohol found in alcoholic beverages. The doctor told the insurer’s investigator that the complainant’s son was clinically intoxicated, and he reeked of alcohol.

The complainant disputed the doctor’s evidence stating that his son used hand sanitizer after the accident and that his son consumed brandy after the accident, which would have attributed to the smell of alcohol that the doctor observed.

Having regard to the son’s whereabouts prior to the accident, the way the accident took place and the attending doctor’s notes, the insurer’s rejection of the claim was upheld on a balance of probabilities by the Non-life Insurance Division.

Teixeira-Mckinon said that the evidence of witnesses is not always conclusive when proving that an insured driver was under the influence of an intoxicating substance.

In another matter dealt with by the Non-life Insurance Division, there was no evidence of the complainant having consumed alcohol prior to the accident, which the complainant denied having consumed.

The accident took place when the complainant failed to stop at a stop sign and a third party collided with his vehicle. The insurer relied on the evidence of police officers who arrived at the scene of the accident shortly after it took place.

The police officers described the complainant as being “tipsy’ and his eyes were red. However, it was pointed out to the insurer that whilst the police officers did ascribe the complainant’s behavior after the accident to him being  under the influence of alcohol, the manner in which the questions were posed to the police officials by the insurer’s assessor were “leading” questions, which presupposed and suggested the answers which the police officials provided.

Further, no questions were posed to the police officials about the complainant’s head injuries and whether these could have contributed to his demeanor post the accident.

Teixeira-Mckinon said that after a thorough examination of the evidence presented by both parties to the complaint, a provisional ruling was issued for the insurer to settle the claim, which the insurer agreed to abide by.

“Even in the absence of evidence of an insured driver being under the influence of an intoxicating substance at the time of an accident, insurers often raise other policy exclusions to reject claims where it is suspected that the insured driver was under the influence of an intoxicating substance.

“Some policies exclude cover where the insured unlawfully leaves the accident scene, which can hinder an insurer’s validation of the claim and lead to a possible rejection of the claim on this ground,” Teixeira-Mckinon said.

Another exclusion which insurers rely on to reject accident claims where it is suspected that the insured was under the influence of an intoxicating substance is the insured’s failure to provide true and complete information regarding the claim.  For example, cell phone data or the vehicle’s tracking data places the insured at a shebeen or pub and the insured either fails to disclose or misrepresents to the insurer their whereabouts prior to the accident.

“The financial implications of a rejected accident claim are not just limited to the insured’s own vehicle damage but extend to the damage caused to a third party.

Consumers are urged to “‘think before you drink, before you drive’,” Teixeira-Mckinon added.

3 November 2025

As South Africans gear up for Black Friday on 28 November, the National Financial Ombud (NFO) urges consumers to think twice before swiping their way into a financial hangover.

While seasonal discounts may offer short-term appeal, the long-term consequences of overspending on credit, including high-interest debt and depleted savings, can undermine essential financial goals and lead to post-holiday hardship.

The NFO has also cautioned that digital fraud tends to spike during the year-end holiday season.

Nerosha Maseti, Credit and Banking Division Lead Ombud at the NFO, said Black Friday, known for  massive sales and long lines, is a shopper’s adrenaline rush with jaw-dropping discounts, limited-time offers, and the thrill of snagging the perfect deal.

“But beneath the buzz lies a financial minefield. Swipe-happy spending can spiral into credit card chaos, and lurking digital scams are ready to pounce when vigilance slips.

“To truly win the day, smart shoppers arm themselves with a plan, stay sharp online, and keep their budgets on lockdown. After all, the best deal is one that doesn’t cost your peace of mind,” said Maseti.

Impulsive spending

Many South Africans use credit to fund Black Friday purchases, but impulsive spending can lead to unmanageable debt.

Maseti said the risks of such expenditure include high-interest credit card balances or short-term loans; depletion of savings intended for essential goals like home ownership, education, or emergencies; and financial strain after the holiday season, when unexpected credit card or loan repayments come due, leaving consumers with limited funds for essential living expenses.

Maseti advised consumers to set a spending budget and stick to it; prioritise long-term financial goals over seasonal bargains; and keep credit balances low to maintain financial health.

Credit card fraud

The NFO also sounded the alarm on a surge in credit card scams. Fraudsters tend to zero in on Black Friday shoppers using non-bank and store-branded credit cards, especially those tied to big-name retailers.

“These criminals contact cardholders by phone, impersonating representatives from these companies, and deceive unsuspecting consumers into revealing their confidential One-Time Pins (OTPs) to make unauthorized purchases at large merchants, leaving victims responsible for fraudulent charges.

“While this scam has been known in traditional banking circles for many years, its rising prevalence in the non-bank credit card market is deeply concerning. The NFO is particularly worried that such fraud will escalate over Black Friday with high transaction volumes and increased consumer activity.

“It is crucial for cardholders to remember that no legitimate company will ever ask them to share confidential information such as card numbers, passwords, or OTPs. Providing an OTP to a fraudster can result in the consumer being held liable for fraudulent purchases, leading to significant financial loss without any benefit,” Maseti said.

Discounted airline tickets

Fraudsters also continue to target bank customers in new ways. A recent case investigated by the NFO revealed a new trend, with the consumer losing R120 000 after responding to a social media advert offering discounted airline tickets.

After submitting her phone number and email via a link, she was contacted through WhatsApp and instructed to download an app from the Google Play Store to access promo codes. Though the link appeared secure, the app was fraudulent and embedded with malware.

Soon after installation, the consumer’s phone began overheating and behaving erratically. The unexpected activation of the camera’s green light raised immediate concerns. Upon checking her banking app, the consumer discovered two unauthorised transactions and swiftly reported the incident to both her bank and the police.

Despite her prompt action within just 27 minutes after the transactions, the bank denied liability, citing that the payments had been authorised via selfie-authentication on her trusted device. The consumer escalated the matter to the National Financial Ombud (NFO), seeking a full refund.

Following investigation, the NFO found that the funds had already been utilised before the fraud was reported, leaving no opportunity for recovery. Also, the bank provided evidence that biometric authentication was used to approve the transactions.

Based on the specific facts of the complaint, it was evident that the compromise originated from the consumer’s interaction with a fraudulent third-party app, which contained malware capable of remote access and biometric simulation.

Maseti said no proof was provided that the transactions took place as a result of maladministration or safety and security failures on the part of the bank.

“By downloading the fraudulent app, the consumer essentially handed over her phone,  including all the information stored on her phone, to the criminals and this resulted in the fraud. The NFO accordingly could not conclude that the bank was liable for the consumer’s loss,” she said.

Anti-fraud tips

To protect against mobile app scams, Maseti gave the following tips:

• Never share your OTP with anyone, even if they claim to be from your credit provider.
• End suspicious calls immediately and contact your credit provider directly using an official phone number and not the number provided by the scammers.

Be sceptical of social media promotions.

• Verify legitimacy: Check official airline websites or verified social media accounts before engaging.
• Avoid sharing personal info: Never post your phone number or sensitive details publicly.

Think twice before downloading apps.

• Use trusted sources – only download apps from verified developers with strong reviews and a high download count.

Monitor your bank accounts closely.

• Check transactions daily, especially after suspicious activity.
• Report fraud immediately to your bank and file a police affidavit if needed.

Get help from the NFO

The NFO assists consumers with credit and fraud-related disputes involving banks and credit providers. The issues include:

• Fraudulent transactions and unauthorised debit orders.
• Incorrect credit listings.
• Reckless lending or contractual disputes.

Consumers facing challenges are encouraged to contact the NFO on tel: 0860 800 900 or email: info@nfosa.co.za.

13 October 2025

Not every file that crosses the desk of the Life Insurance Division of the National Financial Ombud Scheme (NFO) ends in disappointment. Often, the NFO’s intervention flips the script – turning a declined claim into a paid one, restoring dignity, and rewriting a family’s future.

Since January 2025, the Life Insurance Division has helped unlock millions of rands in claim reversals and service-related compensation – money that was once out of reach for grieving families and vulnerable policyholders. But these victories aren’t just financial.

These are the quiet wins that rarely make headlines but echo through hundreds of  households where each payout carries the weight of restored trust, gratitude, emotional closure, and the quiet relief of knowing someone finally listened.

From January 2025 to date, the Life Insurance Division has recovered a total of R140 688 800 (R140,6 million) in respect of claims, including declined claims that were reversed, and compensation awarded for poor service.

NFO shines a light of hope

Denise Gabriels, Lead Ombud of the Life Insurance Division of the NFO, said: “Every day, South Africans face a barrage of troubling headlines – violence, corruption, despair. These stories weigh heavily on our national spirit. At the NFO, we don’t ignore these realities. But we also believe in shining a light on something else: stories of fairness reclaimed, dignity restored, and hope renewed.

“Our mission is to resolve financial services complaints fairly, impartially, and efficiently. We operate independently and without fear or favour, always guided by our values of excellence, integrity, passion, and vision.

“Sometimes our interventions mean that claims once declined are paid in full, delivering life-changing outcomes for families. These stories seldom make front-page news, but they are the ones that allow people to breathe easier, free from the weight of financial hardship.

“Since the beginning of this year, our interventions have resulted in millions of rands being paid back to complainants, alongside additional compensation in cases of poor service. Beyond the numbers, these outcomes carry profound personal impact.”

Misrepresentation by advisor

Gabriels cited a recent final ruling that ordered Metropolitan Life  to pay a funeral claim of R20 000, which was initially declined on the grounds that the deceased did not qualify as a parent under the policy.

The case centred on a misrepresentation by a Metropolitan financial advisor, who had knowingly listed the deceased (described by the policyholder as her godfather and mother’s ex-partner) as her “father” during the policy application.

The insurer argued that the insured did not meet the definition of a parent in the policy contract and that the policyholder should have verified this upon receiving the documents.

The case was considered in a meeting of adjudicators chaired by the Lead Ombud. The adjudicators ruled that the advisor’s conduct created a legitimate expectation that the cover was provided. The panel held that insurers are bound by what is communicated at application stage when incorrect information is given by their own representatives.

Declined claim paid in full

Citing long-standing legal principles, the ruling stated that a party cannot benefit from its own error at the expense of another. As such, the original R20 000 claim, where the waiting period had expired, was upheld. Metropolitan accepted the decision and paid the benefit in full.

Gabriels said insurers are bound by representations made by their agents during the application process.

Policyholders have a reasonable expectation that the terms of a policy reflect what they were told at inception. Misrepresentation by a financial advisor can render the insurer liable, regardless of what the written contract may say.

“An insurer cannot escape liability by pointing to a policyholder’s oversight if the policy was issued based on incorrect information provided by its own representative. This ruling serves as a critical reminder to insurers of their obligations in ensuring transparent and accurate policy information and reinforces the protection of policyholders.

“On the other hand, consumers must answer questions at application stage fully and honestly. Always request and keep a copy of your policy document and read the terms and conditions carefully. Keep your beneficiary nominations up to date.

“If you have a dispute with your insurer that remains unresolved after their final response, you may escalate the matter to the NFO for free, independent assistance,” Gabriels added.

1 October 2025

The law requires all vehicles on public roads to be roadworthy, and insurers are within their rights to reject a claim when a vehicle’s unroadworthiness causes an incident.

Every time a vehicle hits the road, it enters into an unspoken contract – not just with the driver, but with the insurer. That contract hinges on one critical condition: the vehicle must be safe, legal, and roadworthy. When it isn’t, the risks multiply – not only for the driver, but for everyone else on the road.

South Africa records thousands of road fatalities annually, with many linked to vehicle defects that could have been addressed. Making roadworthiness a non-negotiable prerequisite for insurance is not just about reducing insurers’ exposure to unwanted risks- it’s also about protecting lives.

The Non-life Insurance Division of the National Financial Ombud Scheme (NFO) has cautioned that insurers may deny claims or limit payouts if they determine that poor vehicle maintenance contributed to an incident. This means vehicle owners bear significant responsibility for maintaining their vehicles in a roadworthy condition.

Tyres and brake systems that do not meet the minimum requirements of roadworthiness may result in an insurer repudiating a claim. Maintaining the vehicle’s brakes and ensuring that the tyres comply with the National Road Traffic Act 93 of 1996 (“the Act”) are among the minimum roadworthiness requirements.

“Generally, insurance companies provide cover on the condition that the insured party takes reasonable steps to prevent harm.

“In fact, most policies explicitly state that claims may be denied if the insured fails to comply with the Act and the vehicle is not roadworthy at the time of the incident. That denial isn’t punitive – it’s principled and ensures that premiums remain fair for those who uphold their end of the bargain,” says Edite Teixeira-Mckinon, Lead Ombud of the Non-life Insurance Division of the NFO.

She said that by proactively maintaining your vehicle in a roadworthy condition, you can reduce the likelihood of an accident and frequent breakdowns. Faulty brakes and unroadworthy tyres are the most common reasons relied on by insurers to reject accident claims on the ground that the vehicle was not roadworthy.

In respect of vehicle unroadworthiness, expert evidence is often relied on by insurers to demonstrate that the vehicle did not compliant with the Act.

Teixeira-Mckinon cited a case-study where the complainant claimed for accident damage when he lost control of his vehicle and collided with a pavement while driving through a puddle of water. The insurer’s expert found that the left rear tyre was unroadworthy as the two inner tread wear indicators on the tyre were level with the remaining tread pattern of the tyre. The Act declares that no person shall operate a motor vehicle with a tyre where the tread is level with the tyre tread depth indicator.

The expert concluded that the worn left rear tyre could not disperse the amount of water which the front tyres were channelling towards the rear tyres. This resulted in the left rear tyre aquaplaning on the wet road surface. The right rear tyre then also aquaplaned which led to the complainant losing control of the vehicle. On considering all the evidence and submissions made by the insurer and insured, the NFO decided that the insured’s complaint could not be upheld; the insurer had demonstrated that the unroadworthy tyre was the proximate cause of the accident.

It is not enough for the insurer to demonstrate that the vehicle is unroadworthy. The NFO does not only make decisions based on the strict letter of the law. In terms of its equity jurisdiction, the NFO will consider whether the unroadworthy condition of the vehicle was material to how the loss took place.

In a second case-study, Teixeira-Mckinon said the insurer rejected a claim for accident damage on the basis that the brake shoes on the vehicle and the right rear brake disc were worn. In the claim form submitted by the complainant, he stated that he swerved to avoid a pothole when the vehicle fell to its side.

The insurer’s rejection of the claim was overturned by the NFO as the insurer had not demonstrated that the condition of the brakes was material to the way the accident had happened. No mention had been made of the brakes being applied at the time of the loss and, therefore, the insurer had not established a causal connection between the unroadworthy brakes and the accident.

The NFO issued a provisional ruling for the insurer to settle the claim, which the insurer agreed to abide by.

“To avoid the financial burden of a claim being rejected due to a vehicle being unroadworthy, insureds are advised to carry out regular checks to key areas of their vehicles.

“Follow the maintenance intervals recommended by your vehicle’s manufacturer. By not maintaining your vehicle’s roadworthiness, you run the risk of not only compromising your insurance cover in the event of a claim and possibly having to pay for your own vehicle’s repairs but also having to pay for any damage you cause to another motor vehicle and property.

“Ensuring that your motor vehicle is roadworthy is not only a legal requirement but a contractual obligation if your vehicle is insured,” said Teixeira-Mckinon.

22 August 2025

Consumer education is at the forefront of activities by the National Financial Ombud Scheme (NFO) to commemorate Money Smart Week 2025.

Money Smart Week runs from 25 to 31 August under the theme “Smart Money: Financial Foundations for a Resilient Future”.

Empowering individuals to make sound decisions about their purchases of financial products and services and understand their rights as consumers, is widely recognized as crucial for promoting informed choices,

The NFO, an independent body that resolves complaints brought by consumers against South African financial institutions, hosts literacy programmes through ongoing consumer engagements with communities to make money matters understandable.

Head Ombud and CEO of the NFO, Reana Steyn, said the dispute resolution body exists to resolve disputes between consumers and financial service providers fairly and independently. “In the process, we also educate consumers about their rights and obligations, for example, not to be overcharged for financial services, not to be mis-sold products or policies, and not to be subject to unfair decisions.

“Our on-going financial literacy campaign is driven by our responsibility towards all consumers, but particularly vulnerable consumers such as the elderly and disabled consumers, to empower them to understand and use financial knowledge to make informed and effective decisions about money.

“Hence, we have a strong policy in place regarding our extra duty of care towards people we identify as vulnerable complainants. Consumer education on a national basis is crucial for empowering citizens to make informed decisions, protect their rights, and contribute to a fair and sustainable marketplace, ultimately fostering a more responsible and equitable society.

“Our education campaigns provide consumers with easy access to information which can assist them in making informed choices, and taking appropriate action where necessary, in their own interests, and that of society,” said Steyn.

She said by nurturing an informed and empowered consumer base, consumer education contributes to a more level playing field in the marketplace, where businesses are more likely to engage in fair and ethical practices.

Priya Rajah, Head of Communications and Public Relations at the NFO, said by integrating our knowledge of complaint trends, governance, stakeholder collaboration, and consumer education, the NFO ensures that vulnerable consumers receive consistent, fair, and effective support.

A vulnerable consumer is an individual who, due to personal circumstances, financial hardship, or external events, faces an increased risk of harm or disadvantage when interacting with financial services or following a loss event.

To this end, the NFO has put in place a Vulnerable Consumers Policy that ensures everyone receives fair, personalised care by addressing individual needs such as financial distress, age, disability, or life events. Through empathy, personalised support based on individual needs, and swift action, the NFO prioritises dignity and equitable outcomes for those most at risk.

“To promote financial literacy, we host workshops and digital education initiatives focused on budgeting, fraud prevention, and financial resilience.

“The NFO also organises regular discussions with regulators, financial institutions, and consumer advocates to exchange insights and improve service delivery,” said Rajah.

In observation of Money Smart Week, the NFO offered consumers some financial guidance:

• If you are buying a funeral policy, always make sure that the salesperson has a licence from the Financial Sector Conduct Authority to sell insurance.
• Familiarise yourself with your bank’s process to follow if you have been the victim of fraud or if you are suspicious of any activity in your bank account.
• Take immediate action if you notice one of your cards is missing. Contact your credit provider and report your lost card immediately to prevent any fraudulent activity.
• Make sure that your life insurance premiums are paid every month on time. Keep proof of payment. If the premium is not paid, the policy may be terminated and a claim may be refused
• Check your card and bank statements for signs of fraud monthly, especially for purchases you don’t remember making yourself.
• Never share your private credit information especially your PIN and passwords.
• It’s vital that you don’t cancel your non-life insurance or default on your insurance premiums as it is in a time of crisis when you actually need insurance the most.
• Review your credit agreements and monthly loan statements for accuracy. Check your credit report regularly for discrepancies or suspicious accounts and raise concerns promptly with your credit provider, and if unresolved, approach the NFO for assistance.

With virtual banking cards being offered across all digital banking platforms, and with the ability to load these cards on phones and other wearable devices, virtual cards are gaining ground over traditional physical cards or cash.

With the dramatic shifting of credit from a tool for upward mobility to a survival mechanism for basic necessities like food, rent, electricity and transport, alarm bells are being sounded about unsustainable debt levels of consumers.

The NFO is tasked with a number of responsibilities and duties that help keep South Africa’s economy healthy and robust for consumers and fi nancial services providers alike. It’s essential that we maintain an open door policy, keep communications channels clear and accessible while spreading our message, as well as being a responsible, generous corporate citizen.