The Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) has reinvented itself as a digital-first bank, constantly promoting its NetBank app and AI-driven security systems. On paper, it sounds impressive. In reality, it’s a strategy designed to slash costs, close branches, and replace people with machines — at the expense of customer service.

I’ve seen firsthand just how broken this system is. Since June, my business account — which holds tens of thousands of dollars in credit — has been repeatedly blocked. Not because of suspicious overseas transfers, but because of routine monthly debits for well-known services like Adobe, Microsoft, Spotify, and our project management tools. Despite years of identical payments, CBA’s system treats each transaction like a potential crime.

CBA’s entire digital security seems to hinge on its NetBank app and a questionable layer of AI. I now have to log in through the app every single time I access my account—whether at home or the office—even though my computer always connects from the same IP address.

Yet, when it comes to something important, like confirming that my financial controller has authority to make payments from our business account, suddenly the NetBank app is deemed “not secure enough.” This is despite the fact that I’ve completed and signed all the bank’s required paperwork, and even when my staff are standing inside the very branch where our accounts were originally set up.

Then there’s the absurdity of communication. A simple phone call to me, verified with the bank’s much-loved secure ID process, would solve the issue. Instead, their so-called “service centre” is increasingly AI-driven after CBA laid off 34 staff—only to scramble weeks later, trying to rehire them when the AI system proved to be unreliable.

Even accessing my own account from my office PC, using the same IP address I’ve had for years, now requires constant re-verification through the NetBank app. Yet when it comes to something that really matters — confirming that my financial controller was authorised to make payments, with all paperwork signed and staff standing in a CBA branch — the very same app was deemed “not secure enough.”

The contradictions continue. My Tap & Go through Google Wallet was suspended because, according to the bank, customers shouldn’t use two phones. When I tried to resolve the issue, I spent 58 minutes on hold with a call centre now run largely by AI. This is the same bank that sacked 34 service staff earlier this year, only to quietly call some back weeks later when the system began failing.

After lodging a complaint, I waited two months for a response. When it came, the email could have been written by a bot. CBA claimed my attempt to move Google Wallet onto a new phone was flagged as “unusual activity” because there were multiple registration attempts. In reality, the bank had sent security notifications to an old phone that no longer had a SIM card installed, instead of recognising that I was legitimately using a new device.

Their so-called AI couldn’t even recognise the simplest spending patterns — dozens of transactions at my local pub and daily coffees at the same café triggered alarms, while genuine fraud detection was nowhere to be seen.

As for my complaint CBA Claim that their  records show four registrations were attempted using the same credentials (To the old phone which at this stage had had the SIM removed gto the new phone” which of course their smart AI should have picked up.

Owing to there being multiple attempts to use your card details to register for a digital wallet, this was flagged as unusual activity.

(This was despite their so called AI security system being unable to recognise that the rejected debits were at my local pub where there had been 26 transactions over the past few months and at my local coffee shop”.

You contacted CBA on 24 June 2025 and confirmed with us that the registration attempts were genuine and you were attempting to establish the digital wallet on one of the four devices you have registered with CBA.

(Two of those devices are tablets that I use at home).

They then claimed that the card blocks that had been placed on the account had been applied in accordance with Section 11 of the Electronic Banking Terms and Conditions which permits to suspend access to an electronic banking service where there is a risk that you or CBA may lose money.

They then quoted Section 6.1 of the CommBank Credit Card Conditions of Use which permits CBA to suspend a credit card where CBA believes on reasonable grounds that in doing so, this may prevent fraud or other losses.

Wow!

Meanwhile, the bank continues to squeeze customers on fees. One of my less-used accounts slipped into overdraft by under $50 for just a couple of days. The penalty: a $15 fee. At the same time, other business accounts with large credit balances earn no interest — a clear win for CBA’s bottom line, not its customers.

This month, CBA proudly announced a record $10.25 billion cash profit, up 4% on last year. Investors weren’t impressed, and the stock was sold off. But for customers, the message is clear: CBA’s systems come first, people come second.

Digital platforms and AI should improve the customer experience. Instead, CBA has built a fortress of technology that prioritises control and cost-cutting over common sense and service.