GLOBAL SUB-PRIME CRISIS

BANKILEAKS

Click on our Secret Library of Evidence ------>

    BANKILEAKS Secret Library

Loan Application Forms (LAF's)  

    Bank Emails to Brokers  

    Then Click on 'VIEW NOTEBOOK'

Join us on facebook
 

facebook3           facebook2 

BFCSA
MORTGAGE
DISTRESS SOS

What BFCSA Does...

BFCSA investigates fraud involving lenders, spruikers and financial planners worldwide.  Full Doc, Low Doc, No Doc loans, Lines of Credit and Buffer loans appear to be normal profit making financial products, however, these loans are set to implode within seven years.  For the past two decades, Ms Brailey, President of BFCSA (Inc), has been a tireless campaigner, championing the cause of older and low income people around the Globe who have fallen victim to banking and finance scams.  She has found that people of all ages are being targeted by Bankers offering faulty lending products. BFCSA warn that anyone who has signed up for one of these financial products, is in grave danger of losing their home.

Visitors

Articles View Hits
718426

Whistleblowers' Corner!

To all mortgage brokers, BDMs and loan approval officers! 
Pls Call Denise: 0401 642 344 

"Confidentiality is assured."

Cartoon Corner

Lighten your load today and "Laugh all the way to the bank!"

Lee Doyle

Led by award-winning consumer advocate Denise Brailey, BFCSA (Inc) are a group of people who are concerned about the appalling growth of Loan Fraud around the world. BFCSA (Inc) is a not for profit organisation in the spirit of global community concern and justice.

Click on the Cluster Map.

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the blog posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this blog.
  • Bloggers
    Bloggers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Login
    Login Login form

Dr Jeanne Paterson report 2008 Monash University - Banks failed to explain the fraud byu Bankster Engineers

Posted by on in Bankers A Law Unto Themselves
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 2647
  • 1 Comment
  • Print

RESEARCH PAPER BY MONASH UNIVERSITY

 

Please read this, you will then see WHY Ms Denise Brailey has good cause to demand  a ROYAL COMMISSION on the Banking and finance industry and the use of the Broker Channel as agents for the Finance Provider.

Comment from Denise: "This piece is a good find Mort and keep going on the research.  The reality thinking according to bank input into Universities in 2008 does not show the Banks as Engineers.   BFCSA Members all know now - the culprits are the Bank Engineers and the Brokers did not  "fudged income figures" as first thought.   No-one was investigating the criminality of the banking sector.   All Banks and Non Bank Lenders invented and used Speedy the Calculator - to fudged the figures.....  Brokers were simply new recruits in a  high turnover industry, set on Quotas and instructed to simply following orders.  They were told "you are helping disadvantaged people get a better life" - a pre-planned bank strategy.  We will reveal the entire saga shortly....stay tuned).  Now read how the Bank tricked the Academics and Universities and Government into believing a lie: its all the Brokers fault.    Not even the Senators knew the Banks used Skippy the Computer to approve all mortgage loans - no humans involved.  It was automated fraud an a massive scale the likes of which Australia had never seen before and therefore did not fully appreciate the long term ramifications of letting this fraud run rampant.  Lenders were not "tarnished" by Brokers.  In 2004 Bankers only ever trained and employed the brokers.  Then in 2004 they cut them loose and told them they would now be "joint business partners" and keep them all as the Broker Channel for one reason: to keep them one removed from the Bankster dirty secrets of course!  What this document shows is that the Banks knew of the fraud and played it down WHY?  In the consumers' best interests?  Of course not!  They separated themselves as per the chart above circa 2004 to AVOID LIABILITY BUT STILL KEEP THE DICE ROLLING.........  Low Docs was a lucrative business: the Golden Goose!   By casting themselves aside they demonised the Broker to hide their own Engineering of the scam......................................and that is, Ladies and Gentleman: INTENTION TO DECEIVE and steal homes ON A MASSIVE SCALE. Then the banks could always blame the broker when they moved in for the kill.   If you are in that sphere then you need to read all this historical stuff and more...............   Then write your submissions to Parliament NOW - please flood the inbox with submissions                      This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.  

Thanks to the diligence of:

Dr Jeannie Marie Paterson, Senior Lecturer, Faculty of Law, Monash University
assistance was provided by Alice Zhang and Sarah Mauriks

 

You will find the full RESEARCH DOCUMENT at the bottom of this post/page, just click in the link, it will download in document form ready to be read and or printed.

22 pages is a bit much to post on here.

 

MORT (in forensic mode)

                                       

 

 When are lenders tainted by the fraud of a finance broker? 

 

The role of the finance broker is to survey a range of lenders and finance products and recommend to the borrower the combination that would best suit the borrower’s needs. The broker may also be responsible for managing the transaction, including submitting the loan application, delivering the loan documents to the borrower, assisting the borrower in completing those documents and even answering questions about the loan. Credit providers may also see advantages in relying on the services of a finance broker. In particular, brokers allow lenders access to borrowers without the costs associated with a branch presence.

The cases of broker fraud raise the need for care on the part of lenders who rely on brokers to facilitate loan transactions. Broker fraud may lead a lender into a transaction that is significantly more risky than the lender originally realised in a financial sense and also possibly in a legal sense. Generally, a lender will not have any knowledge of the broker fraud so as to be tainted by that conduct. However, in some cases there may be sufficient information in the documents provided to a lender by the broker or borrower to implicate the lender in the wrongdoing. Lenders may therefore be well-advised to develop procedures for monitoring broker facilitated transactions and verifying the information presented in relation to such dealings. There is also clearly a case for stronger regulation to protect borrowers in their dealings with brokers. However, the inexperience of borrowers who may use the services of brokers suggests that they may not be in a good position to monitor the conduct of brokers to ensure compliance with regulatory requirements. Legislative incentives, should also be provided to lenders engage in this process of monitoring

 

LINK:

www.consumer.vic.gov.au/library/publications/resources-and-education/research/when-are-lenders-tainted-by-the-fraud-of-a-finance-broker-2008.doc

Anyone feel like a lot of reading, there is a lot of links to Court Cases at the bottom of the document which may be of interest and worth posting on here highlights.

 

disclaimer:

Posted on this site for research purposes only.

 

Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:

Comments

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Saturday, 06 July 2013

    Comment from Denise: "This piece is a good find Mort and keep going on the research. The reality thinking according to bank input into Universities in 2008 does not show the Banks as Engineers. BFCSA Members all know now - the culprits are the Bank Engineers and the Brokers did not "fudged income figures" as first thought. No-one was investigating the criminality of the banking sector. All Banks and Non Bank Lenders invented and used Speedy the Calculator - to fudged the figures..... Brokers were simply new recruits in a high turnover industry, set on Quotas and instructed to simply following orders. They were told "you are helping disadvantaged people get a better life" - a pre-planned bank strategy. We will reveal the entire saga shortly....stay tuned). Now read how the Bank tricked the Academics and Universities and Government into believing a lie: its all the Brokers fault. Not even the Senators knew the Banks used Skippy the Computer to approve all mortgage loans - no humans involved. It was automated fraud an a massive scale the likes of which Australia had never seen before and therefore did not fully appreciate the long term ramifications of letting this fraud run rampant. Lenders were not "tarnished" by Brokers. In 2004 Bankers only ever trained and employed the brokers. Then in 2004 they cut them loose and told them they would now be "joint business partners" and keep them all as the Broker Channel for one reason: to keep them one removed from the Bankster dirty secrets of course! What this document shows is that the Banks knew of the fraud and played it down WHY? In the consumers' best interests? Of course not! They separated themselves as per the chart above circa 2004 to AVOID LIABILITY BUT STILL KEEP THE DICE ROLLING......... Low Docs was a lucrative business: the Golden Goose! By casting themselves aside they demonised the Broker to hide their own Engineering of the scam......................................and that is, Ladies and Gentleman: INTENTION TO DECEIVE and steal homes ON A MASSIVE SCALE. Then the banks could always blame the broker when they moved in for the kill. If you are in that sphere then you need to read all this historical stuff and more............... Then write your submissions to Parliament NOW - please flood the inbox with submissions [email protected]

    _______________________________________________________________________________________

    Denise, so I understand this, there are 2 issues in this debacle .

    1) The Broker/Agent manipulated/massaged documents to get the loan applications approved (get it over the line ) .
    2) The Broker/Agent on-selling a faulty product. Meaning on behalf fo Finance Providers they marketed, promoted mortgage products "not fit for purpose".

    The way I understand the legal process is in both cases the aggrieved victim has to channel through the Broker/Agent first to get to the bank.
    Or the victim used the bank direct.
    Either way, my point 2 is the Broker/Agent is representing the bank as the product (loan, mortgage) is the responsibility of the bank.

    Would that be correct?



    MOrT (just thinking aloud:D)

Leave your comment

Guest Monday, 13 July 2020