How $44 and an ‘ambiguous’ email caused a credit score nightmare

March 1, 2026 — 5:05am

You have reached your maximum number of saved items.

Remove items from your saved list to add more.

Save this article for later

Add articles to your saved list and come back to them anytime.

In many ways, credit scores can be like ex-partners. When things end amicably, you go out into the world as better versions of yourselves. But when they end badly, the memory of those moments can follow you around for years to come, as we’ve seen play out recently in the NSW Supreme Court.

For those unfamiliar with the story, a problem first arose last year when the Reserve Bank handed down an interest rate cut, about which St George Bank then notified its customers. In its correspondence with a woman named Fiona Vinall, the bank said the reduced rate would see her pay $44.11 less on her mortgage repayments “after July 10”. On the surface, that’s a great money win!

Unfortunately, it wasn’t quite that straightforward. Vinall understandably interpreted the email to mean that any repayments made throughout the month of July, but after the 10th, could be for the revised amount. But according to St George, what they meant by “after July 10” was actually from August 1. As such, the bank automatically clocked one of the repayments as being in deficit.

Despite the bank quickly identifying and rectifying the issue, the two parties now find themselves in court because of what transpired in those few short weeks between the bank’s initial email and the missing $44.11 being repaid.

In Australia, banks are legally required to inform credit-rating agencies of shortfalls within 14 days – even if it’s for an amount less than $50 on a loan literally the size of a house. That means St George reported Vinall’s under-payment as “adverse repayment history information”, and that subsequently, her........

© The Age