Skip to content

ACCC & DSB | CDR Implementation Call Agenda & Meeting Notes | 31st of March 2022

Jump to bottom
CDR API Stream edited this page Mar 31, 2022 · 7 revisions

CDR Implementation Call Banner

Agenda & Meeting Notes

When: Weekly every Thursday at 3pm-4.30pm AEDT
Location: WebEx, quick dial +61-2-9338-2221,,1650705270##

Meeting Details:

Desktop or Mobile Devices https://treasuryau.webex.com/treasuryau/j.php?MTID=m9614a7c6166155d3d950a8999e437f9f Once connected to your meeting remember to start your audio and video
Please mute when you are not speaking.

Video Conferencing (VC) Rooms
Use the remote control or touch panel and dial the number indicated below:
External VC Room: 1650705270@webex.com

Phones - AUDIO ONLY

Agenda

  1. Introductions
  2. Actions
  3. CDR Stream updates
  4. Presentation
  5. Q&A
  6. Any other business

Introductions

  • 5 min will be allowed for participants to join the call.

Recording

The Consumer Data Right Implementation Calls are recorded for note taking purposes. All recordings are kept securely, as are the transcripts which may be made from them. No identifying material shall be provided without the participant's consent. Participants may contact@consumerdatastandards.gov.au should they have any further questions or wish to have any material redacted from the record.

Acknowledgement of Country

We acknowledge the Traditional Custodians of the various lands on which we work today and the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people participating in this call.
We pay our respects to Elders past, present and emerging, and recognise and celebrate the diversity of Aboriginal peoples and their ongoing cultures and connections to the lands and waters of Australia.

Updates

Type Topic Update
Standards Version 1.16.1 Published Link to change log here
Maintenance DSB Maintenance Iteration 10: Agenda & Meeting Notes on 30th of March 2022 Link to the agenda and minutes
TSY Newsletter To subscribe to TSY Newsletter Link here
DSB Newsletter To subscribe to DSB Newsletter Link here
TSY Newsletter 21st of March 2022 View in browser here
DSB Newsletter 25th of March 2022 View in browser here
Consultation Normative Standards Review (2021) No Close Date
Link to consultation
Consultation Decision Proposal 229 - CDR Participant Representation Placeholder: no close date
Link to consultation
Consultation Decision Proposal 240 - ADR Metrics Feedback closes 15th of April 2022
Link to consultation
Consultation Decision Proposal 245 - Enhancing Data Recipient Accreditation Negotiation Link to consultation
Design Paper Design Paper: Consumer Data Right Rules and Standards for the Telecommunications Sector Link to DSB GitHub
Link to Treasury page

CDR Stream Updates

Provides a weekly update on the activities of each of the CDR streams and their stream of work

Organisation Stream Member
DSB CX Standards Michael Palmyre
DSB Technical Standards - Register Ivan Hosgood
DSB Technical Standards - Energy Hemang Rathod
DSB Technical Standards - Banking Mark Verstege
DSB Technical Standards - Engineering James Bligh

Presentation

None.

Q&A

Questions will be received by the community via WebEx chat before the questions are opened to the floor. Participants can submit questions outside of the CDR Implementation Call to the CDR Support Portal.

We are using Sli.do for Question and Answer. Join our Q&A live here: https://www.sli.do/ Code: #747194

Answer provided

The following table will be updated after the meeting.

Ticket # Question Answer
1365 Ok, based on the answer DSB outlined from 1281. so for whatever reason that a user loses this Secondary user account privileges to transact, this should mean that he now loses his eligibility as a secondary user.
I wish to find out how that ineligibility then affects:
Secondary user instruction (question 1)
If he has been given Sec user instruction previously to share data, then:
1. Does this mean his Secondary user instruction will need to be removed automatically?
1(a) if not, why not? Are we allowing a secondary user instruction to remain set for a ineligible person? Wouldn't it be confusing for users?
1(a.1) If he somehow regains Secondary user eligibility (i.e. able to transact) , it somehow just works?
1(a.2) this counts as DH refusal ?
1(b) if yes, there's no rules that I can identify that indicate that DH needed to notify the account owner(s) to let them know that a a user's secondary user instruction is removed so they might not know why it doesn't allow for sharing. The DH just stops the data, and withdrawn the instructions. The CX withdrawal standards couldn't come into "play" to inform any of the account owners or secondary user since it's not a user initiated withdrawal .
1(b.1) If he somehow regains Secondary user eligibility (i.e. able to transact) , does it mean he will need to request the account owners to re setup the instruction? (without knowing he lost it in the first place)
1(b.2) assuming if yes(to remove sec user instruction), would this counts as DH refusal ?
1(b.3) considering the last statement in 1(b), the withdrawal standards only requires DH to advise consumer as part of the sec user instruction, but nothing to cover/govern in the event of a automatic removal, is there a gap?
Sharing agreements (question 2 and 3)
2. Does this mean his sharing agreements that he shared on the account will stop sharing data for the account but not withdrawing the account from those sharing agreements? (essentially just pausing data flow , basically same as removing sec user
(instruction)
OR
3. Does this mean his sharing agreements that he shared on the account will stop and the account be withdrawn from sharing agreements?.
3(a) if accounts are withdrawn, does it count as expired? or withdrawn? it triggers different email content to the account owners i think.		 Thanks again for this question. Please refer to our recently released secondary users guidance which is available here.
1370 My question is in relation to the wording change for eligible customer from
"is set up in such a way that it can be accessed online by the CDR consumer" to the following: "is that the person is able to access the account online."
For joint account customers, where only one of the account holders is registered for online banking (not uncommon in relationships for one party to do all the banking), and the other is not registered for online banking - BUT has the ability to register by putting in their email address and OTP, does this mean that the joint account is ineligible to data share even though they will be "pre-approved" an only require one person to start a consent?.		 A CDR consumer is considered eligible in the banking sector if they satisfy the eligibility criteria in rule 1.10B and clause 2.1 of schedule 3. As you mentioned, one of the eligibility criteria is that the CDR consumer must be able to access the account online. Our knowledge article on the Definition of an eligible CDR consumer explains that the purpose of the eligibility criteria is to ensure that a data holder has some online credentials it can leverage to authenticate the customer. We consider that a CDR consumer is able to access their account online if they have credentials in place to use online banking.
Please note that Treasury has confirmed that the amendment to the wording of the eligibility criteria for the banking sector resulted from some ‘housekeeping’ amendments undertaken as part of the v4 rule amendments (to move common elements of eligibility for the banking and energy sectors into new rule 1.10B, while sector specific elements remained in the sector schedules). Treasury acknowledges the amendment has resulted in inconsistent language, but has confirmed that the policy intent was for the eligibility requirements for the banking sector to remain unchanged. That is, consistent with the CDR support portal guidance, the policy view is that CDR consumers in the banking sector must have an online account set up to be eligible.
Section 4 of our Revised joint account implementation guidance states that all joint account holders must be ‘eligible’ consumers in their own right in order to be able to share joint account data. Hence, each joint account holder must be aged 18 years or older and hold an account with the data holder that is open and accessible online. Please also refer to our knowledge article on Joint accounts and eligibility for more information.
1414 Within the 'Joint Accounts implementation guidance 2022 PDF' section 5.9 states
Data holders must update the disclosure option management service as soon as practicable to give effect to:
- any disclosure option indicated by a joint account holder
- any changes to a disclosure option, and
- the withdrawal of a disclosure option.
we would like you to please define the term ' withdrawal of a disclosure option' in this statement.
I believe this may be a error in choice of wording and that this section refers to withdrawing consent from an authorisation OR changing a disclosure option to 'Non disclosure'		 Thank you for raising this with us, it's very helpful to have this kind of feedback. We have amended paragraph 9 to read:
"Data holders must update the disclosure option management service as soon as practicable to give effect to any change in the disclosure option."
This should be reflected in the guidance shortly.
1420 Scenario: Invoking the GET balances for specific endpoint API resource[1] with sending the meta field value as null.
Sample Request Body:
{"data":{"accountIds":["<account id 1>","<account id 2>"]},"meta":null}
Question: What should the data holder do when it receives this? Since this is a null do DH should omit that from the request and process? or since they are sending null to a field that should use only if necessary should DH reject the request? If they should reject what is the expected error?
Thanks in advance for your help.
[1] https://consumerdatastandardsaustralia.github.io/standards/#get-balances-for-specific-accounts 		This is at the discretion of the Data Holder. Technically the Data Holder would be within their rights to reject with error. This may create a poor customer experience, however, so the Data Holder may opt to be more tolerant and allow the request to succeed as there is nothing in the meta tag that is needed for this request.
1431 Is there a guidance document for business accounts /secondary users / authorised representatives similar to the one for joint accounts?
Also, are there any wireframes for nominating an authorised representative?		 Please find our recently published secondary user guidance here. We intend to publish guidance relating to non-individual / partnership accounts and the nominated representative provisions shortly, relevant updates will be contained in the CDR newsletter.

Useful Links

View a number of informative and useful links in the Consumer Data Standards Implementation Guide on Information Links.

Getting Started

Meetings

Maintenance Iterations

CDR Implementation Call

Clone this wiki locally