It's always the cover-up rather than the crime. And it's the cover-up that will haunt AMP for years.

When it comes to tallying up the list of atrocities committed against the community, examined in detail at the royal commission, AMP was a relatively minor offender.

Of the $220 million in fees siphoned from customers without any intention to provide a service, AMP only accounted for $4.5 million. It didn't even attempt to charge dead people, at least as far as we know.

The prize for the greatest rip-off in this category goes to the Commonwealth Bank, which, as the commission heard, managed an impressive $118 million in charges for doing absolutely nothing and with no intention to do anything. It also pioneered the concept of charging the deceased, adding a new item to that old adage about the certainties of life.

But, despite this latest scandal, CBA has managed to slink away from the glare of public gaze — overshadowed by the meltdown at AMP, which this morning saw the departures of chairman Catherine Brenner and in-house legal counsel Brian Salter.

Chief executive Craig Meller beat a hasty retreat a fortnight ago. But if those running Australia's oldest investment house thought that would be the end of it, they were deluding themselves.

Last Friday, senior counsel assisting the royal commission Rowena Orr, QC stunned onlookers with a declaration that the Commissioner Kenneth Hayne should consider recommending criminal charges over AMP's attempt to mislead the corporate regulator over the theft.

Sorry, this video has expired Counsel assisting recommends criminal charges for AMP over Clayton Utz report

If the rip-offs were bad enough, the action taken by AMP to cover up and deceive the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) and the public took the issue to an entirely different level.

At least the banks had enough smarts to stump up their well-rehearsed apologies.

AMP misled ASIC and its customers, commission hears

AMP's legal problems are centred on two specific issues. The first is its deliberate attempt to mislead ASIC on at least 20 separate occasions over the theft of client funds.

Sorry, this video has expired Jack Regan loses count of how many misleading statements were made to ASIC

And the second relates to a supposedly independent report AMP offered up to the regulator that went through 25 different versions, with changes suggested by AMP.

The commission heard that the report, by Brian Salter's old law firm, Clayton Utz, included a change requested by Catherine Brenner via email that it, "include a statement to the effect that [chief executive] Craig Meller was unaware of the practices or their illegality".

It is that bit of dynamite that ultimately dislodged the chairman.

Even after conceding to ASIC about the fee grab's "illegality", AMP continued to give a wildly different explanation to its own customers, explaining the refunds as an "administrative error".

Chairman's departure 'removed from reality'

After weeks of torrid commentary and ever louder calls for her removal, on Monday morning, Ms Brenner resigned following an extended crisis board meeting that took up most of Sunday.

The statement issued to the Australian Securities Exchange explaining her departure to shareholders was as removed from reality as its customer explanations.

It largely ignored the immense pressure of irate shareholders — who've seen $2.2 billion evaporate in the past few months — publicly demanding her removal.

The royal commission's interim report isn't due until September 30, with the final report due early next year.

It's highly likely, however, that the commission will be extended given the extent of the wrongdoing that has been unearthed in such a brief period.

That means the legal uncertainty will hover for years. Mr Hayne will make his recommendations next year at the earliest, including criminal charges. It will then be up to ASIC and the Director of Public Prosecutions to proceed, which most likely will involve further lengthy investigations.

It's not the first time AMP has found itself embroiled in controversy over stealing from its customers. Back in 2006, it was caught overcharging but let off the hook by ASIC, who gave it a slap over the wrist.

This time, the consequences are far more dire.