The lawsuit was dismissed by Federal Court Justice Steven Rares on Thursday, three months after it was filed.

The customer, who was a US citizen, claims she suffered a loss of $230,000 to $300,000 after a Citigroup representative, Widiana Setiawan, allegedly gave financial advice to her and her husband to invest in five investment products offered by the bank.

“As a result of following the advice given by the respondent’s employee, the applicant suffered capital losses and loss of the profits she would have made if she had been given investment advice that was in the applicant’s best interests,” the lawsuit said.

“Had [the applicant] received appropriate financial advice…she would have invested in either an affordable investment property in Melbourne or a multisector balanced index fund in AUD.

“Each of these alternative investments would have preserved her capital and generated a profit.”

A representative Citigroup confirmed the lawsuit had resolved but declined to provide further comment.

According to the lawsuit, the couple met with Setiawan in April 2016 to discuss investing their funds held in the US.

The pair had recently moved to Melbourne from the US after receiving an inheritance from a relative, held in an Australian Bank account in US currency.

The couple told Setiawan they were concerned that converting the inheritance into Australian dollars would reduce its value because the exchange rate was poor, according to the lawsuit.

They allegedly told Setiawan they were inexperienced investors and the inheritance money was the bulk of their savings. The couple said they wanted to use the money to buy their first home, according to the lawsuit.

The couple allegedly told Setiawan that other than the inheritance they had $10,000 in savings and no superannuation. They told Setiawan they were relying on the inheritance to help plan their retirement, according to the concise statement.

Setiawan was also allegedly told that the couple were renting in Melbourne and had two young children, the oldest of whom was attending primary school.

Setiawan was allegedly informed that the couple could not afford a high-risk investment.

During their meetings, Setiawan allegedly told the couple that they could reduce their risk by having one higher risk, higher return investment and one lower risk, lower return product.

Setiawan advised that Citibank offered two investment products in US currency which were “not risky” because they were linked to the performance of the big four Australian banks, according to the lawsuit.

But the lawsuit claims the investment products were “complex, capital at risk” products.

Citibank and Setiawan allegedly received commissions from the investments advised to the couple, which resulted in a USD $93,098 loss from 2013 to 2017.

In 2019, Citibank ran a remediation program for customers who had invested in fixed coupon products, which Setiawan had recommended. Citibank decided the couple was not eligible for remediation in August 2020.

According to the couple’s lawsuit, Citibank implied it was giving general advice but gave personal advice because Setiawan considered their personal objectives, financial situation and needs.

Citibank was accused of breaching the Corporations Act by failing to give the couple a statement of advice, failing to act in their best interests and not giving “appropriate” advice.

The case alleged that even if Citibank had given general advice, it did not provide financial services “efficiently, honestly and fairly” because it recommended “complex, sophisticated and risky” investments to the couple, who were inexperienced investors with limited assets.

The couple are represented by Paul Batley, instructed by Maurice Blackburn.

Copyright Lawyerly Media. Unauthorized reproduction or distribution of this article is prohibited.

A reprint licence is required to reproduce or distribute this article. Contact Us for a reprint licence.