ASIC has commenced legal proceedings in the Federal Court of Australia against Venture 5 Group Pty Ltd (trading as CashnGo Australia), alleging that CashnGo:
- Engaged in unconscionable debt recovery practices.
- Employed unfair contract terms.
- Failed to provide direct debit default notices that complied with the relevant legal requirements to 67,545 consumers.
ASIC alleges that, between 20 April 2022 and 7 May 2025, CashnGo had 227,148 small amount credit contracts on foot with consumers. About 20% of these contracts, which were held by 34,833 consumers, experienced an unscheduled debit by CashnGo after defaulting on a payment. This unscheduled debit left them with less than $5 in their bank account.
During this period of time, CashnGo earned a total revenue of $77 million.
Through its online loan application process, CashnGo either obtained consumers' internet banking login details or required consumers to connect their bank account to a third-party provider. This enabled CashnGo to monitor consumers' bank balances on an hourly basis and, in the event of default, debit the consumer's bank account to repay some or all of the amount owing. ASIC alleges that, as a result of this monitoring, CashnGo was able to debit a consumer's account as soon as funds became available.
ASIC alleges that CashnGo knew, or ought to have foreseen, that as a result of this practice, many defaulting consumers would lose control over their finances, have insufficient funds to meet necessary living expenses and/or experience financial hardship.
ASIC Deputy Chair Sarah Court said, 'ASIC is committed to preventing and deterring this kind of conduct among credit providers, which in this case we allege is systemic and unconscionable'.
This action aligns with ASIC's enduring priority to target misconduct involving a high risk of significant consumer harm, particularly conduct targeting financially vulnerable consumers.
Last year ASIC successfully pursued a Federal Court case against Cigno Australia and BSF Solutions, which provided short-term loans and charged excessive fees to over 100,000 consumers (24-111MR).
