Scandal-plagued wealth management firm AMP faces another class action, this time from its customers, who are hoping to claw back hundreds of millions of dollars lost after their super funds were allegedly eroded by fees.

Key points: Maurice Blackburn claims 2.5 million AMP superannuation accounts have been charged too much in administration fees

Maurice Blackburn claims 2.5 million AMP superannuation accounts have been charged too much in administration fees Lawyers believe the damages against AMP could be "very, very significant"

Lawyers believe the damages against AMP could be "very, very significant" The financial company is already being hit with a shareholder class action

Law firm Maurice Blackburn said the latest lawsuit would be based on revelations at the banking royal commission that AMP routinely charged more in administration fees than they should have.

Principal lawyer Brooke Dellavedova said there could be large damages against the financial company.

"Collectively we believe there are about 2.5 million accounts, so the damages are likely to be very, very significant," she said.

The company is already facing action from its shareholders, after its stock price plummeted following the inquiry.

It is also being taken to court by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), which is seeking civil penalties against the company.

Lead plaintiff Sebastian Smith said he had "no idea" how much he had lost in fees since first joining the super fund, which was the default provider for his employer.

"My ideal outcome is that everyone gets all the money back that they should have, and it's calculated on what that would have been worth at retirement age," he said.

"Dishonesty is dishonesty … if you're taking $10 a month off someone that 40 years later is worth $100 or $200 a month, then I think you're taking $200 a month off them.

"It's like stealing something … it's just putrid I think."

Ms Dellavedova said the case would take information dating back to 2013, and would argue AMP group-related companies were charging customers incorrectly, for example, applying fees of 1.5 per cent, when they should have been 0.5 per cent.

Lawyers believe the damages against AMP could be very significant. ( ABC News )

"If for example you … had a super balance of say $100,000 in one year alone, that would be an overcharge of $1,000," she said.

"It's a six-year claim period, so over the course of the period that would be $6,000 — not taking into account the compounding effect, because obviously super is intended to be continually invested and to yield compounding returns."

In a statement, AMP said it would defend the action.

"On the basis of the information provided to us by the media, we understand the potential action relates to AMP superannuation trustees and AMP meeting its obligations to members. On this basis, we would defend the matter vigorously, if served," the statement read.

"AMP and the trustees of its superannuation funds are firmly committed to acting in the best interests of their superannuation members and acting in accordance with legal and regulatory obligations."

AMP said it had cut fees to two superannuation products over recent years, including MySuper.

Professor Michael Legg from University of New South Wales said class actions could have wider implications for shareholders and to a lesser extent, customers.

"It's more of a case that if a company has to make a large payout, then you can expect … the prices of their products, subject to the competitive conditions of the market, might have to increase to be able to cover the payout," he said.

Class action market is 'crowded'

Professor Legg said a class action was often the only way people could afford to "assert their rights".

"It's certainly become a lot more crowded than it used to be, because we've had a lot more litigation funders enter the market, and we've also had a lot more lawyers turn their hand to being able to do class actions," he said.

"Because litigation is becoming very expensive, a lot of people just can't afford to actually try to assert their rights, unless it's through a class action and so the lawyers, I think, are then starting to say well if that's the vehicle that provides access to justice, I want to be able to operate in that space."

Since last year's banking royal commission, AMP has been in the headlines for the wrong reasons — from charging its customers fees for no service to deliberately and repeatedly misleading ASIC about its wrongdoing.

Revelations from the royal commission led to AMP's chief executive Craig Meller, chair Catherine Brenner, and half its board stepping down.

The financial company is already being hit with a shareholder class action, also led by Maurice Blackburn, after the firm won the right to put the case to the court over four other firms who were jostling to represent investors against the company earlier this month.

Maurice Blackburn's Brooke Dellavedova said the case would give customers the chance to band together to recover funds. ( ABC News: Norman Hermant )

In a separate matter, individual AMP executives could face criminal charges over the billion-dollar fee-for-no-service scandal.

Ms Dellavedova said the case would give super fund holders who had lost a "relatively modest" amount of money in fees the opportunity to seek justice.

"Most people wouldn't themselves sue AMP over losses of several thousand dollars, but if the group comes together and brings an action then they can recover that money," she said.

"It is an important issue, because it's money that people have earnt, it's their money, it's for their retirement and it builds up over time."

The class action will be paid for by litigation funder Harbour, who will take 20 per cent of any settlement of up to $125 million in damages and 10 per cent on money over that.