After two days and over twelve hours, the inquiry lead by Kate Carnell into the banks' treatment of small businesses is over.
Whether it achieves anything requires a longer term view but for now let's take a look at some of the issues the small business ombudsman was able to force the banks to reflect on.
1) Small business contracts are too complicated for the average person to understand.
Ms Carnell pushed each of the banks on the matter of transparency and contract complexity.
"I would agree with you that at 86 pages it can be potentially daunting for someone to read all of that. That's why we do support the proposal to…have a very simple, short cover sheet as a key covenant for the terms of the loan," said Graham Hodges, deputy CEO of ANZ.
David Lindberg of Westpac also agreed.
"I hear your views. I concede that we want to make them even simpler. I also concede that contracts in a space are complicated, can be complicated, have been complicated and that goes against transparency," he said going on to explain that ideally the customer should have the contract explained in full to them by a banker.
2) Banks have more power in the relationship than the small business, which while it sounds obvious, has been a point of contention.
For example this exchange between ANZ and Ms Carnell in which the bank defended the existence of a unilateral right to trigger a default being written into a contract.
MS CARNELL: So do you agree, and this is a really simple yes or no answer, that the wording of covenants and clauses give the banks the unilateral right to trigger a default?
MR HODGES: Well, I think that's more a legal question...
MS CARNELL: It's easy, it's yes or no.
MR HODGES: ...and I would say...
MS CARNELL: It's yes or no.
MR HODGES: No, I would say the answer is – in my understanding, it would be no. We don't default. We don't – as a practice we do not default.
MS CARNELL: I said right, and I accept that. The issue is, do they give you the right?
MR HODGES: Well, just let me ask my lawyer.
MS CARNELL: Okay. The answer is yes.
3) Small businesses should get proper notice if their loan is not going to be rolled over so they can go and find another lender in time, somewhere between three and six months.
The inquiry made a specific point of cases where small business customers were only told their loan was being cancelled at the very last minute.
"Nothing could be worse than giving someone no time, pulling the loan facility and saying good luck, because what's that going to lead to is a panic on the part of the banker, it's going to lead to a stigma when they go and try and get alternative funding and quite likely it's going to lead to them going bankrupt," said Mr. Lindberg of Westpac.
"I've conceded that we should have a principle; that that principle should be codified. And then I would also concede that we should do something around having a minimum (time). But I would ask for some sensible reflection on some of the unintended consequences, because it has to be applied to every single business," he said.
4) That over seventeen banking inquiries in recent years hasn't actually changed that much.
Ms Carnell was candid with representatives of the banks about her cynicism regarding their capacity to change.
"You've had lots of them [inquiries] and it hasn't changed anything," she said.
MR COHEN: I agree. It has been a frustrating process for all involved. As I said, I…
MS CARNELL: Are you sure it's frustrating for you? Isn't it exactly what you want?
MR COHEN: No, it is. No. No, actually.
MS CARNELL: No change?
MR COHEN: No, it's not. If we step back a second and look at how business and banking intersect, it's actually not in the interests of the industry to continually being at loggerheads with customers.
MS CARNELL: I understand that.
MR COHEN: It really isn't. And so – and I understand the concern around inaction over a period of time. The fact of the matter is that banks continue to appear before inquiries where recommendations are made and things don't happen is not a satisfactory process.