Our goal is to help people in the best way possible. this is a basic principle in every case and cause for success. contact us today for a free consultation.
Practice Areas
Newsletter
Sign up to our newsletter
Australia-wide · No win, no fee · Free case evaluation — speak to us today
REGULATION & COMPLAINTS
Discovering that a professional has acted dishonestly — or with a recklessness that falls far outside what their role demands — is a particular kind of unsettling. It is not just the harm itself. It is the fact that you trusted someone with qualifications, professional obligations, and a duty to do right by you, and they did not. Whether a solicitor misappropriated your funds, a financial adviser steered you toward products that lined their own pockets, or a doctor concealed something you had every right to know — the breach of that trust matters. This page explains what professional misconduct actually means under Australian law, which bodies handle complaints, and why a regulatory complaint and a civil claim for compensation are two entirely separate things that can run at the same time.
UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS
Professional misconduct in Australia occurs when a licensed practitioner behaves in a way that falls significantly below the standards their profession requires — whether through dishonesty, serious incompetence, or a substantial breach of their professional obligations. It is handled by the relevant regulatory body for that profession, separately from any civil claim you may have.
The legal definition shifts slightly depending on the profession and the jurisdiction, but the underlying idea is consistent. Under the Legal Profession Uniform Law 2014 (NSW and VIC), ‘professional misconduct’ for lawyers includes conduct that is substantially below the standard of competence and diligence a member of the public is entitled to expect, as well as conduct that would justify a finding that the lawyer is not a fit and proper person. Other professions use similar frameworks through their own legislation and codes.
It is worth understanding the distinction between professional misconduct and what most regulatory bodies call ‘unsatisfactory professional conduct’ — a lesser category for behaviour that falls below an acceptable standard but does not reach the threshold of serious misconduct. The difference matters because the consequences are different: unsatisfactory conduct may lead to a caution or conditions on practice, while serious misconduct can result in suspension or removal from the register entirely.
REAL SITUATIONS
The following are examples of the kind of conduct that regulatory bodies investigate. These are real situations — not abstract categories.
KNOW THE DIFFERENCE
This is probably the most important thing to understand before you decide what to do next — and it is also the thing most people get wrong.
Professional misconduct and professional negligence are not the same thing, and they do not go through the same process.
Professional misconduct is a disciplinary matter. When you make a complaint to a regulatory body — AHPRA, a Law Society, ASIC — you are asking that body to investigate the professional’s conduct and, where warranted, take disciplinary action. That action might mean a formal reprimand, conditions placed on their licence, suspension, or deregistration. What it will not do is put your money back. The regulatory process is about professional standards and public protection — not compensation.
Professional negligence is a civil matter. It is a claim you bring in court against the professional who caused you loss. The purpose is financial recovery — damages to compensate for what their failure cost you. Courts assess negligence claims using the framework established in cases like Rogers v Whitaker (1992) 175 CLR 479: did the professional owe you a duty of care, did they fall below the required standard, did that failure cause your loss, and can that loss be quantified?
| Aspect | Professional Misconduct | Professional Negligence |
|---|---|---|
| Nature | Disciplinary / regulatory | Civil / compensatory |
| Who handles it | Regulatory body (AHPRA, Law Society, ASIC…) | Courts (via civil litigation) |
| Outcome if successful | Reprimand, suspension, deregistration | Financial compensation (damages) |
| Your financial recovery | None directly | Yes — the purpose of the civil claim |
| Can run in parallel | Yes | Yes |
The critical point is this: both processes can come from exactly the same set of facts, and they can run in parallel. Filing a complaint with AHPRA does not prevent you from also pursuing a civil negligence claim. Winning a regulatory complaint — having the professional disciplined — does not automatically translate into compensation either. These are separate paths, and you may be entitled to pursue both.
Many people who make a regulatory complaint do not realise a civil claim may also be available to them. By the time they find out, the limitation period has sometimes already expired.
WHO HANDLES YOUR COMPLAINT
The body you complain to depends entirely on the profession involved.
Complaints about lawyers are handled by the Legal Services Commissioner in each state and territory, or by the relevant Law Society or Bar Association depending on the nature of the complaint and the jurisdiction. In NSW and VIC, the Legal Profession Uniform Law 2014 standardises definitions and processes. In Queensland, complaints go to the Legal Services Commissioner under the Legal Profession Act 2007 (QLD). Outcomes range from informal resolution to formal disciplinary proceedings before a tribunal.
The Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency — AHPRA — is the national body covering 15 registered health professions: doctors, nurses, dentists, pharmacists, psychologists, physiotherapists, and others. Complaints can also be made to state-based health complaints entities, such as the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission, particularly where patient safety is the concern. AHPRA’s focus is on whether the practitioner remains safe to practise — compensation for the patient is not part of that assessment.
ASIC (the Australian Securities and Investments Commission) handles complaints about financial services licensees and their representatives under the Corporations Act 2001 (Cth). For individual complaints against financial firms, the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) is the external dispute resolution scheme — and unlike most other regulatory bodies, AFCA has the jurisdiction to award compensation directly, up to its determination limits. This is worth knowing before you decide which path to take.
Complaints about accountants can be directed to CPA Australia or Chartered Accountants ANZ depending on the accountant’s membership body, and to the Tax Practitioners Board for registered tax agents and BAS agents. The Tax Practitioners Board can suspend or deregister a practitioner but does not award compensation.
Engineering complaints are handled differently across states. Engineers Australia handles conduct complaints against its members, while state-based licensing authorities — such as the Building Commission in Victoria — regulate registered practitioners. For building and construction matters, state fair trading bodies are also relevant.
State-based fair trading and consumer affairs offices handle complaints about licensed real estate agents and conveyancers. In NSW, that is NSW Fair Trading. In Victoria, Consumer Affairs Victoria. These bodies can investigate and discipline practitioners but generally do not award compensation beyond any trust account shortfall recoverable through statutory fidelity funds.
WHAT TO EXPECT
The process varies by regulatory body, but the general shape is consistent across professions.
Lodge your complaint
Most regulatory bodies accept written complaints by email or through an online portal. You will need to describe what happened, identify the professional, and attach supporting documentation — correspondence, contracts, invoices, reports.
Initial assessment
The body determines whether the complaint falls within its jurisdiction and whether it meets the threshold for investigation. Not every complaint proceeds. Some are resolved informally; others are referred elsewhere.
Investigation
Where accepted, the body investigates. This typically involves obtaining the practitioner’s response to the allegations, gathering documents, and sometimes seeking an independent expert opinion. Investigations can take months.
Determination
Outcomes range from no further action — which is common for less serious complaints — to formal caution, conditions on practice, suspension, or referral to a professional tribunal.
Tribunal hearing (serious cases)
Matters involving serious allegations — misappropriation of funds, criminal conduct, repeated significant failures — may be referred to a professional disciplinary tribunal. Sanctions at this level can include deregistration.
No compensation to you
None of these outcomes result in compensation to the person who made the complaint. If recovering your financial loss matters, a regulatory complaint alone will not achieve that.
In most Australian states and territories, professional negligence claims must generally be commenced within three years of the date you became aware — or should reasonably have become aware — of the negligence that caused your loss. This limitation period may be running concurrently with any regulatory complaint you have made or are considering.
Filing a complaint with a regulatory body does not pause the civil limitation clock. Missing this deadline cannot be undone, regardless of the outcome of any disciplinary proceedings. If you are unsure whether your limitation period is still open, get an assessment from our team as soon as possible.
YOUR NEXT STEP
Regulatory bodies exist to protect the public and uphold professional standards. They are not there to compensate you. If a solicitor’s dishonesty cost you a property settlement, if a financial adviser’s conduct wiped out part of your retirement savings, if a doctor’s failures left you with treatable harm that was allowed to progress — the regulatory complaint addresses their professional status. The civil claim addresses your loss.
Fair Go Australia works with people at exactly this intersection: those who have experienced professional misconduct and want to understand whether a claim for compensation is also available to them. The evaluation is free. There is no obligation. And we will give you an honest answer either way.
We respond to all enquiries within 1 business day.
COMMON QUESTIONS
Most regulatory frameworks draw a distinction between these two categories. Unsatisfactory professional conduct refers to behaviour that falls below an acceptable standard but does not reach the threshold of seriousness that warrants the label of misconduct. Think of it as a spectrum: at one end, a minor procedural failure that warrants a caution; at the other, dishonesty or repeated serious incompetence that puts public safety at risk. The practical difference matters because the available sanctions are different — misconduct can result in suspension or deregistration, while unsatisfactory conduct typically leads to conditions, training requirements, or a formal reprimand.
Yes. These are separate processes and they do not prevent each other. A regulatory complaint asks a professional body to investigate conduct and impose discipline if warranted. A civil claim asks a court to award you financial compensation. Both can arise from the same underlying facts. There is no legal requirement to exhaust one before pursuing the other, and the outcome of one does not determine the outcome of the other.
No. In almost all circumstances, filing a complaint with a regulatory body has no effect on the statutory limitation period for a civil negligence claim. The clock continues to run regardless. If you are in the window where both a complaint and a civil claim are potentially available, get advice on the civil claim promptly — the regulatory complaint can follow, but the civil limitation period will not wait.
Generally, yes, though the level of detail provided to the complainant varies by body and jurisdiction. Most regulatory bodies will notify you of the outcome of an investigation. However, they are often limited in how much procedural detail they can share during an active investigation, and outcomes involving confidential disciplinary processes may not be disclosed in full. Do not assume that a lack of communication means nothing is happening — but equally, do not base your decision to pursue a civil claim on whether you expect the regulatory complaint to succeed.
The more specific and documented your complaint, the better. Useful materials include: a clear written account of what happened and when; copies of contracts, retainer letters, or engagement agreements; correspondence with the professional (emails, letters, text messages); any reports or advice they prepared; financial records showing the loss you suffered; and, where relevant, independent expert opinions. You do not need a perfect evidence file before lodging — the regulatory body will gather evidence through its investigation — but a clear and specific complaint is more likely to be taken seriously at the initial assessment stage.
Some regulatory bodies accept anonymous complaints, but their ability to investigate is typically more limited where the complainant cannot be contacted for further information or to verify the account. If you are concerned about retribution or privacy, it is worth speaking to the body directly about how it handles complainant confidentiality. In most circumstances, your identity will be known to the body but not necessarily disclosed to the practitioner at the outset.
Our goal is to help people in the best way possible. this is a basic principle in every case and cause for success. contact us today for a free consultation.
Sign up to our newsletter