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
631477

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!"

Denise Brailey

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

BFCSA: Fraudsters are hiding in the BIG FOUR Bank Boardrooms. Estimates of 2.7 million fraud victims

Posted by on in Bankers A Law Unto Themselves
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 3455
  • 4 Comments
  • Print

To catch a Fraudster you need to look no further than the Board room of the Major Four Banks and their 85% share of Low Doc FRAUD.  

In reply to the article below:

 

No-one really takes anything ASIC, GADENS or the MFAA take seriously....brokers or borrowers..........................Peter KELL of ASIC believes a "crack down" is when BFCSA start throwing documents into Parliament.... Denovan and his crystal ball suggests  "number of mortgage fraud incidents drop".  Getting yer stories in sync guys? KELL was still saying "no systemic issues," and now changed to a "significant decline in fraud."  Well Mr Kell that's very comforting to the victims!

Then Kell suggests: "In a majority of cases, these matters concern loan applications to ADIs which have been identified and reported by the industry."  Oh so only a few hundred thousand is not endemic?  For the uninformed ADI's means FOUR MAJOR BANKS have 85% ownership of toxic LOW DOCS..................

Then dumb Jenny Boddington says that, "in most instances, brokers can simply use common sense to identify whether a loan application looks fraudulent."  Yeah right Jen,  The staff inside the bank on "Quotas" were fudging the income figures, didn't you get the memo?  Then the Industry is pretending: "FROM SOPHISTICATED, organised criminal activity to the seemingly ‘softer’ falsification of income by individual borrowers, fraud is a major concern for mortgage brokers and lenders alike."  The only reason its of concern to the public, is that the public were the victims and scapegoats and the Banks were the Engineers.  

Oops, the wheels just fell of all your little trolleys!!!!  Someone burst your dirty little bonus bubbles did they?  Then the Industry luminaries on the take, decided to pay Galaxy to dream up these figures: "as many as 2.7 million Australians have deliberately falsified details on their loan applications by either exaggerating or underestimating figures."  here is ASIC saying no fraud, banks trying to blame brokers and borrowers and miraculously, The Industry coughs up 2.7 million fraudulent LAFs and blames the borrower.  I would love to see the empirical evidence on that little furphy. And then this:  Fraud remains a significant concern yes only since BFCSA Members put it on the table for all to see.  Industry Crocodile Tears are only for the loss of "integrity" which they never had.....

That translates to a known 2.7 million victims of bad bank lending practices and who are all these people? Oh its going to be a lovely war!  The luminaries better start working out the compensation This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

To catch a fraudster

The number of incidences of mortgage fraud may be on the decline, but fraud remains a significant concern – both to the industry and to ASIC – as The Adviser discovers

FROM SOPHISTICATED, organised criminal activity to the seemingly ‘softer’ falsification of income by individual borrowers, fraud is a major concern for mortgage brokers and lenders alike.

According to a recent study by Galaxy, as many as 2.7 million Australians have deliberately falsified details on their loan applications by either exaggerating or underestimating figures.

But while 2.7 million borrowers may have admitted to falsifying their loan documents in one way or another, few make it through to settlement.  

According to Veda, there were just over 6,500 incidents of mortgage fraud in 2011.

Mortgage Settlements Australia’s national compliance and risk management director Paul Agnew says there are “numerous reasons” for the proliferation of mortgage fraud, including desperation and lower moral standards.

According to Mr Agnew, a “large number of people [now] believe that falsifying applications is part of the norm and not a crime”.

New technologies have also helped borrowers feel comfortable dabbling in mortgage fraud.

“Criminals now have easier access to the information and technologies needed to commit mortgage fraud,” he says.

Of course, while borrowers form a majority of those responsible for mortgage fraud in Australia – law firm Gadens believes at least 80 per cent of all successful mortgage fraud can be attributed to the borrower – they are not the only ones massaging the truth for their own gain.

The mortgage market’s fraudsters also include brokers, originators, valuers, accountants, legal advisers and lenders.

In its most pernicious form, fraud can involve a syndicate of market participants colluding to obtain loans or property by a variety of unlawful means, including providing false information.

And according to Veda’s general manager of fraud and identity solutions, Imelda Newton, mortgage fraud ‘rings’ are more common than one might think.

“Of the recorded 6,500 mortgage fraud incidents in Australia in 2011, there was a real mix as to the culprits,” Ms Newton says.

“Individual fraudsters did not dominate the incident numbers and nor did fraud ‘rings’ – both really played an equal part.”

Geographically speaking, however, incidents of fraud tend to take place in the same areas year after year.

“In our research, we can look at which areas produce more cases of mortgage fraud than other areas,” she says, “and there are definitely some key ‘hot spots’ or suburbs that stand out among the rest. More interestingly, these ‘hot spots’ rarely change and are really one of the few constants in mortgage fraud.”

While most industry participants are at pains to emphasise a majority of practitioners are honest and diligent, as Price Waterhouse Coopers’ Fraud in the Mortgage Industry report revealed recently, even a level of mortgage fraud below one per cent represents serious potential losses in a multi-billion dollar industry.

So, where do the risks lie?

IDENTIFYING THE CULPRITS
First, it is important to know exactly what constitutes fraud and to identify some of the most common fraudulent practices.

According to Gadens’ John Denovan, the term ‘mortgage fraud’ covers a wide array of concepts, including misrepresentation of financial employment or identity, false valuation or intentional default following a cash-out action.

“Fraud is a very strong word,” he says.

“While there are a lot of borrowers out there who will partake in fraudulent practices in order to receive a bigger loan, there are others who supply slightly incorrect information or fail to acknowledge outstanding credit card payments.

“While sometimes this is a genuine mistake on behalf of the borrower, it does constitute fraud.”

In fact, Mr Denovan believes more than 90 per cent of all mortgage fraud cases are the result of carelessness on behalf of the borrower or the broker.

Due to the large amount of documentation involved in securing a mortgage, there are numerous areas that are vulnerable to fraud.

Gadens’ research shows the top five documents that most commonly contain falsified information are tax returns, bank deposit information, security valuation, employment verification and loan applications.

Borrowers can provide false information on their loan application in several ways, including income, debt and employment. They can also do this with their tax return, where they try to show they earn a higher income.

Similarly, many borrowers will also make changes to their employment dates, hourly or salaried earnings and job title. Another common fraudulent practice is making cash injections.

Mr Denovan says it is not unusual for borrowers to make large cash deposits before seeking the advice of a broker, giving the adviser the impression that the borrower has saved more than they actually have.

This is one of the most common practices since many borrowers do not believe it to be deemed “fraudulent”, he says.

“They will get their parents or someone else to deposit a huge chunk of money into their account to ‘prove’ that they have genuine savings,” Mr Denovan says.

Other borrowers may try to alter their property valuation. While this practice is not at all common, given that most brokers conduct their own valuations, it is not unheard of.

Moreover, this type of fraud can be committed by the borrower, the valuer or by both.

The borrower can alter the valuation on the actual document; the valuer can inflate the value of the home; or the borrower can pay the valuer to bump up the price of the property.

Veda’s Imelda Newton says it is even not unusual to find an application that has been “completely fabricated”.

“In instances where the mortgage fraud is committed by an individual, they will, in most cases, falsify their various loan documents, including employment contracts and bank statements. But in instances where the mortgage fraud is committed by third party or organised crime rings, they will, in most cases, falsify the personal identification documents,” she says.

“At Veda, we have seen cases where the person applying for a loan is completely fabricated. In some instances, the fraudster has just changed the date of birth on a real ID to avoid bad credit checks, while in other instances, they have invented the person entirely.”

While the latter example is much rarer, according to Ms Newton, it still happens, which is why Veda created an electronic ID verification tool that can be used both by brokers and lenders.

The ‘ID Matrix’ lets a lender or broker enter the potential borrower’s details into the system and check whether or not the person actually exists.

“We do this through various data sources,” Ms Newton says.

“We use certain data files including passports, Medicare cards, driver’s licences and the electoral roll, to name but a few. By checking the person’s details against all of these external data sources, we can confirm whether or not they are a real person, with a real credit history.”

PICKING THE FRAUDSTERS
While there are tools to help brokers and lenders identify mortgage fraud, QBE LMI’s chief executive officer Jenny Boddington says that, in most instances, brokers can simply use common sense to identify whether a loan application looks fraudulent.

According to Ms Boddington, most of the documents that QBE LMI sees that contain anomalies are pay slips and bank statements.

“Brokers should ask themselves whether the pay slip has been issued by a professional pay roll system or does it look like it could have been created using Microsoft Word?” she says.

“Does the pay slip contain all the information you would reasonably expect to see? If a broker has any concerns, it’s best to obtain an original bank statement and check it to see if it shows the borrower’s wage deposits.”

With bank statements, Ms Boddington says, the key to the broker’s identifying and preventing this type of fraud is personally sighting and photocopying original documents.

This also holds true for personal identification documents. Where possible, the broker should confirm the information and supporting documents with the issuer.

Meanwhile, with the non-disclosure of liabilities, the broker needs to ask the right questions. These include questions like, ‘Do you have a car loan?’ or ‘Do you have any store credit cards?’ which can help jog the borrower’s memory.

“Checking the borrower’s bank statement for payments to other financial institutions helps as a starting point for these questions,” Ms Boddington says.
“If the broker identifies any anomalies in the loan application or supporting documents, they should contact the lender to discuss their findings with them.

“Remember, the devil is in the detail and a close examination of some supporting documents may be warranted.  Brokers also need to stay current with trends and issues impacting the industry to enhance their effectiveness in the fraud prevention process.”

While a large percentage of potential borrower mortgage fraud can be identified by verifying and checking the loan documents for anomalies, Rate Detective Home Loans’ Warren Dworcan says brokers can also identify fraud by just “trusting their gut instincts”.

“When a client is very anxious for the loan to settle when there is no urgency, alarm bells should ring,” he  says.

Moreover, if the client is unwilling to provide documents that the bank has requested, or they deliberately avoid answering a broker’s probing questions, then it is usually because they are hiding something or being fraudulent.

“I also find any borrowers who get defensive when banks are asking for additional information are hiding something,” Mr Dworcan says.

“I like to live by the old adage ‘Where there’s smoke, there is fire’. Similarly, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, it generally is a duck.”

FRAUDSTER-FRIENDLY TECHNOLOGY
While gut instinct may help a broker spot potential fraud, 2013’s fraudster is a smart, tech-savvy animal. And they have access to very advanced technology.

Printers, copiers and scanners can all be used to make fraudulent documents look just like the original.

A quick Google search for ‘How to make fraudulent documents look real’ came up with plenty of results – including kits that can be purchased online to falsify everything from a doctor’s certificate to marriage certificates.

Indeed, the internet is bursting with information on how to get away with fraud.

So, what hope is there for the honest broker? How can a single operator with a backlog of clients and upcoming appointments be expected to check and verify every single document?

Loan Market’s Paul Smith says there are simple steps that brokers can take to ensure any documents they are given are 100 per cent legitimate – steps that won’t force brokers to work on every loan application for an inordinate amount of time.

The first step is verbal verification, says Mr Smith. “Brokers should verbally verify employment income and employer, including independent verification of the employer’s phone number,” he says.

“Performing this verification as close to settlement as possible will help prevent scams that involve temporary phone lines.

“Secondly, all brokers should carry out independent credit report checks. Credit report checks should be reviewed all the way down to the last line.

Checking with the listed financiers, where possible, to check the current status of the enquiry [is also important].

“Thirdly, all brokers should ensure they receive proper borrower/guarantor identification, as per AML/CTF legislation.

“Fourthly, brokers should verify that the seller on the contract is indeed the owner of the property.

“And finally, it is vital that all brokers ensure the loan documents they receive are the originals and not facsimile or photocopy records, which may have been altered,” Mr Smith says.

This is a step that Mortgage Choice’s compliance and corporate standards manager, Tim Donahoo, supports.

Mr Donahoo says all Mortgage Choice brokers are encouraged to retrieve original documents from their client, rather than rely on photocopied or faxed versions.

“It makes business sense,” he says. “While it is possible to make a fraudulent document look like an original, it is very difficult and most brokers will be able to identify a fraudulent document straight away.”

REPERCUSSIONS FOR BROKERS
Provisions of the National Consumer Credit Protection Act (NCCP) now require brokers, by law, to take “reasonable steps” to verify a consumer’s financial situation.

Where there is reason to question information provided by a consumer, then it is particularly important that the information be verified.

If it cannot be verified, or there is evidence to suggest it is fraudulent, it is likely the credit should be assessed as unsuitable.

According to the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC), “a broker should not facilitate the provision of suspect information to a prospective lender, and should consider referring evidence of fraudulent conduct to the police”.

Where a broker has failed to identify borrower fraud, it is unlikely they will lose their licence. That said, Homeloans’ general manager for sales, Greg Mitchell, believes the repercussions associated with not identifying borrower fraud are still quite serious since such cases can put a “grey cloud over the broker’s name”.

“If a broker’s integrity or simply their professionalism is questioned, the repercussions can impact on a broker’s income and reputation – and the industry talks,” he says.

Where the mortgage broker themselves has acted fraudulently, however, the repercussions can range from expulsion from the industry to a prison sentence.

ASIC commissioner Peter Kell says under section 33(2) of the National Credit Act, the penalty for providing false documents is two years’ imprisonment, a fine of up to $17,000, or both.

“The Crimes Act provides the court with the power to multiply the fine by four in the case of corporations,” Mr Kell says.

“In addition, the broker may also be banned from engaging in credit activities and have their credit licence cancelled.”

In recent months, ASIC has made it very clear the regulator is “cracking down” on fraudulent mortgage applications submitted by brokers. And, in instances where ASIC has uncovered a fraudulent application, the industry watchdog has used the case to send the rest of the third party distribution channel a firm warning.

Late last year, in a landmark case, ASIC laid its first criminal charges under NCCP against a NSW-based mortgage broker who entered a plea of guilty to 10 charges, including mortgage document fraud.

Daniel Nguyen pleaded guilty to nine offences against section 33(2) of the National Credit Act for providing false documents to banks for nine home loans totalling more than $3 million between 29 July 2010 and 7 January 2011.

In addition, the Sydney broker pleaded guilty to one offence against section 11.2(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code and section 123(6) of the National Credit Act for assisting three clients to apply for credit contracts that were unsuitable for them between 28 September 2010 and 7 January 2011.

At the time of the offences, Mr Nguyen was the sole director and sole employee of MAI Pacific Pty Ltd in Bankstown.

The broker was given a two-year good behaviour bond by the Sydney District Court.

But Mr Nguyen isn’t the only broker to come under the industry watchdog’s eye. According to Mr Kell, ASIC has filed more than 120 credit matters for formal investigation since licensing came into force.

“ASIC will continue to concentrate on the mortgage broking industry and ensure that brokers are adhering to the new [NCCP] laws,” he says.

“We stress that brokers familiarise themselves with their obligations under the National Credit Act. They should know the law, read our guidance and seek additional/external advice if they feel they need it.

“While we aren’t in a position to nominate percentages due to broker fault and borrower fault, I can say that in a significant percentage of cases, brokers have been at least aware of false information or documents being provided, or otherwise have actively participated in the provision of false information,” Mr Kell continues.

“ASIC is particularly concerned with instances where persons have engaged in fraud or other misconduct relating to information provided in loan applications. Since the commencement of the NCCP, ASIC has banned six persons from engaging in credit activities for such conduct and has 18 other current investigations.

“In a majority of cases, these matters concern loan applications to ADIs which have been identified and reported by the industry.

“While ASIC regularly undertakes compliance reviews and publishes reports and guidance on compliance risks and good practice, we will not hesitate to take action where we encounter deliberate breaches, serious misconduct or significant risk of consumer detriment.”

In November 2011, ASIC published Report 262 on its review of finance brokers’ responsible lending practices between July 2010 and December 2010.

While the watchdog found brokers were aware of the responsible lending obligations and were taking steps to comply, there were also a number of areas in which improvements could be made.

“ASIC is currently finalising a review of how credit licensees with a large number of representatives – including aggregators – are monitoring and supervising their representatives’ compliance with the responsible lending obligations,” Mr Kell says. “We expect to publish a report of our findings in the next couple of months.”

THE BENEFITS OF NCCP
While Mr Kell has made it very clear that ASIC will continue to watch the mortgage industry “very closely” and “crack down” on fraudulent activity by brokers, it should be noted that since the introduction of NCCP, the number of fraudulent mortgage applications has significantly declined.

According to data from Veda, there were over 11,000 documented mortgage fraud incidents in 2009. In 2010, that number had decreased significantly, falling to 10,500.

The volume of incidents fell further still in 2011, tumbling to just 6,500 reported cases of mortgage fraud.

Gadens’ John Denovan says the decline can be attributed to NCCP: “Legislation has cleared out a lot of the cowboy brokers,” he says. “It has made the industry significantly more professional. Today, there are very few bad eggs.

“Brokers would never want to put their trail, career and livelihood in jeopardy. They are good, professional advisers. If and when mortgage fraud does occur, I would assume, in the majority of cases, it is as a result of broker carelessness,” he says.

“They haven’t properly conducted their due diligence. While this is bad and can ultimately cost them their trail, it does not mean that they are fraudulent.

“I think we will continue to see the number of mortgage fraud incidents drop as the industry continues to mature and become more professional,” Mr Denovan says.

Mortgage & Finance Association of Australia (MFAA) data reinforce his view.

According to the MFAA, only 12 mortgage brokers have been expelled since the introduction of the new NCCP regulations – a remarkable figure given that there are 10,000-plus mortgage brokers operating within the industry.

 

Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:

Comments

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Friday, 14 March 2014

    Gfs246

    So FOS is under the pump....
    We knew this.....
    But so much that they have 2 administration positions advertised on seek......

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Friday, 14 March 2014

    As for fraudulent LAFS... I can (and FOS and RAMS) clearly see that in house fudging of my information was done after my signature was obtained.
    At banks headquarters RAMS Credit Assessors, in their own handwriting have altered figures and left comments, the nature of which would have set alarm bells ringing for a PRUDENT LENDER... (actually, are there any??)

    Alarm bells ringing loud and clear to at least call us to verify the figures (but RAMS knew they were dodgy as they changed the figures themselves)

    We can plainly read the CA's own handwriting commenting (on the Loan statement we provided to the Broker) that our savings history was not available and that our loan repayments had been capitalized.

    The other Lender - which incidentally was also a dodgy loan but COSL does not handle fraud and besides, this non conforming/non confirming Lender did not have to abide by any banking rules if it didn't wish to... (Can you believe that??) ends up being paid out by RAMS thank you very much... and gets away with their bad deeds unpunished... and we are stuck with this refinance which had buffer money added to help us pay the bank back with their own money.... We were also offered a credit card linked to this refinance but declined.

    This is such a big scam and now "they" GALAXY RESEARCH admit 2.7million fraudulent LAFS are out there.... again blaming the broker and the borrower... not the Credit assessors and their superiors at all ...

    After all we all know that Brokers don't approve loans Credit Assessors do.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Saturday, 15 March 2014

    Duped

    When you read these reports it's almost laughable, they will blame everyone but themselves. We are talking big money here and with the thought of good commissions and figures coming in to their offices it becomes a greedy fraudulent power game to the banks. If they have a pulse they will get a loan.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Saturday, 15 March 2014

    If they're going to try to bury FRAUD like that they'd better get their stories in line.
    Apparently Jon Denovan had to reach for the smelling salts and a bottle of Grange - FRAUD is such a scary word. We're not surprised, Mr Denovan. How do you think WE felt? Plus anyone with such a pivotal role in the architecture of this fraudulent lending set up, not to mention how to get around the client, regulator, EDR and Court requests for documentation, while advising the Board of an impartial dispute resolution service would be feeling a little faint by now!
    They're all still trying to put up a wall of resistance: the borrower and the brokers did it. Trying to mislead the judiciary and the public, to counter all the stories of evidenced foul play is more likely. Judges do respond to some public opinion - con the public again: is that the game with these apparently official mouthpieces? Of course they'll have to avoid the hard core black and white evidence to be able to say such nonsense with a straight face, especially when talking to aware people in the street and journalists who can see right through them. This is not just about how much Banks make each year: it's about upholding and applying the Law correctly.
    It's simple: someone from the Ministry says "I hear there's a problem with Fraud" - The Expert (e.g. from ASIC) replies "No" or "Nothing significant" or "Not as far as we can see" or "Nothing big enough to be considered systemic" or "We've caught the brokers/borrowers who did it" or, now, "there used to be some fraud but we're on top of it." (Containment)
    "Good" says the Ministry representative, "What's next on the agenda?" End of that problem. This has gone on for years! Now there's a lot more talk about it so more effort is going into Containment of the Problem. But so far it's like chooks pecking at it and avoiding the core issue: prevention by banning the service calculators. The rest is window dressing.
    There are probably thousands of FRAUD cases yet to come in. Why? Maybe they're waiting to sell their properties and/or finish their debt obligation to avoid the dreadful suffering and poorly handled case experiences endured by their friends (who had no choice) at the hands of stressed staff in overloaded dispute resolution services. Until the system is fixed some people would rather keep paying if they can to keep the rogue side of the Banks and Lenders and their nasty legal friends away. Others are opting for a quick quiet clean up via their lawyers. I don't blame them one bit for avoiding the rule changing, bun fights and unfair practices that seems to be plaguing some cases in the public dispute resolution service ... And if possible avoid chancing it in Court while this new and dynamic area of Law is still being road tested and proven.
    As for Veda and other Credit Report Agencies, I wonder how they got those stats? Won't it be interesting to see how many people ensure that their default status is correctly recorded as a Fraud Loan under investigation?
    Bottom line: statistics, lies and wishful thinking are failing to convince those who have seen the evidence with their own eyes. We suggest the "experts" take off their rose colored glasses and do the same.

Leave your comment

Guest Wednesday, 18 September 2019