Compliance Radar

Who was sanctioned, and for what?

Fines, court rulings and incidents from Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific: 1,828 cases from 37 jurisdictions, each with an official source and checked against that source before publication. Filter by country, area of law and sector. Click a chart to drill down one level.

2cases from 1 jurisdiction
€835,189Total of monetary amounts (1 case with an amount)
€835,189Largest single case: Kiwibank Limited
€835,189Median per case with an amount

Click a bar to drill down one level.

Where?

by authority
  1. Auckland District Court (Anklage: Commerce Commission) €835,189 100 % · 1 case
  2. Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) – 0 % · 1 case

What for?

by area of law

All areas of law

  1. Consumer protection and online retail €835,189 100 % · 1 case
  2. Money laundering and terrorist financing – 0 % · 1 case

Who?

by company
  1. Kiwibank Limited €835,189 100 % · 1 case
  2. NZForex Limited – 0 % · 1 case

When?

per quarter, by date of decision
Trend
PeriodCasesTotal
Q4 20230–
Q1 20240–
Q2 20240–
Q3 20240–
Q4 20241€835,189
Q1 20251–
Q2 20250–
Q3 20250–
Q4 20250–
Q1 20260–
Q2 20260–
Q3 20260–
Q4 20260–

2 cases

18 Mar 2025 NZForex LimitedNZForex: formal warning over 3,182 unreported transactions New ZealandMoney laundering and terrorist financing Reprimand or warning

The company disclosed to the DIA (Department of Internal Affairs, New Zealand's AML/CFT supervisor) that, because of a system error in its prescribed transaction reporting, 3,182 transactions not denominated in New Zealand dollars had not been reported to the Police Financial Intelligence Unit between November 2017 and February 2024. On 18 March 2025 the DIA issued a formal warning under the AML/CFT Act 2009 and, given the prompt voluntary disclosure, refrained from more serious action; NZForex must provide the final report of an independent audit and report on its remediation.

What organisations can take from it

Reporting processes for prescribed transactions need regular reconciliation so that system errors do not go unnoticed for years; early self-reporting can substantially reduce the sanction.

Relevance to training and awareness

Complete reporting of prescribed transactions to the FIU

Authority / court
Department of Internal Affairs (DIA)
Area of law
Money laundering and terrorist financing
Legal basis
Anti-Money Laundering and Countering Financing of Terrorism Act 2009 (Meldung vorgeschriebener Transaktionen)
Action
Reprimand or warning
Status of proceedings
unknown
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
Prompt voluntary disclosure, admission of fault, fixing the system error, reporting all outstanding transactions and a voluntary independent audit.
Published
18 Mar 2025

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

26 Nov 2024 Kiwibank LimitedKiwibank: 1.5 million NZD fine for systemically misapplied customer terms New ZealandMisleading advertising and pricing €835,189

The bank pleaded guilty to 21 charges under the Fair Trading Act because for years it had not provided services to customers on the agreed terms, for example discounts and interest-free periods under package agreements, correctly calculated repayments, the switch to principal repayments after interest-only periods and correct fees. Around 35,000 customers were overcharged a total of 6.8 million NZD; on 26 November 2024 the Auckland District Court imposed a fine of 1.5 million NZD. According to the Commerce Commission (New Zealand's consumer and competition regulator), the causes were errors in electronic systems and a lack of quality assurance checks on whether staff knew and followed the processes.

What organisations can take from it

Agreed terms must be correctly set up in systems and monitored through quality assurance; system errors are no excuse.

Relevance to training and awareness

Correctly applying agreed terms in banking processes

Missing or inadequate training played a role in the decision.

Authority / court
Auckland District Court (Anklage: Commerce Commission)
Area of law
Consumer protection and online retail · Misleading advertising and pricing
Legal basis
Fair Trading Act 1986, ss 13(i), 40(1)
Action
Fine
Status of proceedings
final
Sector
Financial services and insurance
Mitigating circumstances
The bank had identified and reported the errors itself and is progressively refunding customers 9.2 million NZD.
Published
27 Nov 2024

Original amount 1,500,000 NZD, converted at the ECB reference rate of 26 Nov 2024.

Checked against the official source on 3 Oct 2026 · Direct link

Report an error

Anonymous: we store only your text, no contact details and no IP address.

Ready for training that actually lands?

Try the combination for free: automated administration for you, learning formats that fit your team, with no minimum or credit card.

Start 14-day free trial