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 


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.


Articles View Hits

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

BFCSA; NAB and grab - PRIESTLEY The Farmers Story (REPOSTED)

Posted by on in Bankers A Law Unto Themselves
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 3470
  • Print

BFCSA; NAB and grab - PRIESTLEY The Farmers Story

Posted by CHANGE on Thursday, 25 July 2013 in Banks Behaving Badly


NAB – PRIESTLEY The Farmers Story


26/7/13 - UPDATE from Claire - the farms were taken over three weeks after the close of tender by our neighbors and we have not been advised of the sale price.

Chris and Claire Priestley are siblings from Carinda near Walgett in NSW. They are third generational farmers, having been in the Carinda and Brewarrina areas for over 100 years. 

Carinda is the little outback town featured in the David Bowie song “Lets Dance” 

They grew up on the family farm “Salt Glen” that was part of five adjoining properties, a mixed farming business of beef cattle, cotton and wheat. 

In 2004 they purchased three of these properties from their father located on the lower Macquarie river where the Barwon and Castlereagh rivers converge making it a gem site for water access in this part of the Murray Darling Basin, similar to Cubby Station. This purchase was enabled by the National Australia Bank in Walgett during the worst drought in the Federations history and when Cotton and Wheat prices were still ordinary. Within 10 days of applying for the loans the NAB had offered them an overdraft and Bill facility. Drought continued until end of 2009. 

The NAB is the biggest agribusiness lender in Australia and promotes its commitment to agriculture every week in the Land Magazine. 

The NAB executive summary of August 2004 states “I believe your goals of committing to irrigated agriculture by buying your own farm, to build your long term wealth, can be met”. When the Priestley's could finally build their long term wealth when the drought finally did break this statement by the NAB proved to be false and misleading. 

The business grew two irrigated cotton crops in 2004 and 2005, however prices were still low. Due to the drought sufficient water for cotton did not return until the end of 2009. When water was available in 2010 to grown irrigated cotton again, the NAB refused. 

The Priestley's belief that the NAB were there to assist them grow their business was supported when in 2006 the NAB approved the purchase of a joining property creating a neat square of four properties that were located on both sides of the Macquarie river. 

In 2008 they grew their first harvestable wheat crop meeting predicted budgets, but in 2009 the NAB refused to finance crops. Upon reflection the NAB had inserted impossible repayment terms in a 2008 loan document giving the bank the excuse to deem them unviable even though in 2004 the Priestley's were led to believe the NAB were there for the long term of at least 15 years. In 2008 the NAB got the Priestley’s to sign without legal advice a new contract that without explanation changed the repayment dates of the loans. 

The NAB expected the Priestley's to refinance when the drought still continued and the GFC meant other lenders were not interested in refinancing them. The NAB take government interest subsidies of about $470,000.00 since 2004 and then told the Priestley's to refinance when they were still drought declared.  

On Boxing Day 2009 the drought broke with flooding, giving the best seasonal opportunity to grow cotton and wheat and provide a remedy to the debt. The NAB Agribusiness promotions include the NAB Wealth Team for farmers created in 2005, the Priestley's were offered no such service. Contrary to NAB promotions of structuring interest repayments to farm income never applied to the Priestley loan and before they knew it the NAB had conveniently defaulted them even though at the time of default they had equity in wheat sales of about $300,000.00. 

In January 2010 discussions took place where the NAB Agribusiness managers refused to look at the farms and witness the large amounts of water in the Macquarie river that should have been utilized for cotton production, and the high moisture levels for wheat. 

The managers told the Priestley's to sell without any crops in the ground. 

In April 2010 the Priestley’s made complaints about their unfair treatment, and under their contract the Code of Banking Practice must investigate all complaints, these complaints were ignored and they were served Farm Debt Mediation which is the commencement of enforcement action. 

In May 2010 the Priestley's wrote a detailed letter of complaints about their agribusiness managers to Cameron Clyne NAB CEO, Mr Clyne did not instruct his staff to investigate these complaints but rather his staff advised Farm Debt Mediation is the proper forum. Here the contract had been breached. Farm Debt Mediation is not mentioned in the Code of Banking Practice and is not a free service as the Code commits to. Farm Debt Mediation is not the proper forum for investigating complaints as committed to in the contract under the Code of Banking Practice. Farm Debt Mediation does not make up part of the contract as the Code of Banking Practice does. Farm Debt Mediation is not included in the ASIC definitions of External Dispute Resolution serviced. Farm Debt Mediation is not for the investigation of complaints about the two managers, especially when they went to the mediation. 

Defying the NAB and their unreasonable demands, the Priestley's refused to sell and sowed 9,300 acres of wheat in May 2010, a crop worth $4million due to the unbelievably good season and prices hitting a high. As punishment for refusing to sell they were served Farm Debt Mediation. 

Farm Debt Mediation took place in July 2010. This mediation was controlled by the NAB, they were forced to sign a confidentiality agreement and forced to sign an agreement that had obligations that if breached meant that enforcement action was to continue. The NAB refused to look at cotton budgets, applied penalty interest rates up to 18% and required $1million from the 2010 wheat crop that they refused to finance. If the Priestley's did not agree court was the only option under Farm Debt Mediation. Farm Debt Mediation makes no concession for natural disasters.  

The second natural disaster flooding event hit again in November 2010 and reduced the value of this crop to about $800k and making Farm Debt Mediation obligations impossible to meet. The 2010 wheat crop was the best ever grown, worth at least $4million. 

The Priestley’s therefore breached their Farm Debt Mediation and in 2011 the NAB told them to sell again without any assistance to present the farms for sale properly with crops in the ground. They refused to look at new budgets based on cotton being worth $1000 a bale, the highest on record. 

In July 2011 the Priestley's advised NAB of a potential sale or part sale to the local Aboriginal Community’s of Walgett and Brewarrina for Crime Prevention Training programs with incredible community support. 

The Priestley's asked Cameron Clyne for assistance as NAB is at the forefront of Reconciliation Action plans, the two directors Daniel Gilbert and Mark Joiner being leaders in such Aboriginal Pastoral training programs. Cameron Clyne refused the request for a financial planner with Indigenous expertise. Rather the Agribusiness manager gave the Priestley’s until November 30, 2011 to achieve this sale. This was never going to be long enough for the interested group to comply with the required studies and finance applications. 

In November 2011 the Priestley’s put the farms up for sale by auction. The two interested buyers refused to pay for the whole of the four properties due to a sub-division that had not gone through and could take up to twelve months. The auction was a waste of time however this was done to show the NAB they had tried to fit in with them. Because they were unable to sell the NAB deemed this as the perfect excuse to start possession. 

The Priestley's asked the NAB to discuss the Aboriginal proposal and wait for their feasibility study to be completed in about April 2012. The NAB refused to discuss it and commenced court action in the Supreme Court on 6 February 2012. This is the bank that has its own NAB Reconciliation Action Plan and its director Daniel Gilbert launched the Gilbert and Tobin Reconciliation Action Plan. Seems like another NAB promotion with no substance.

 The Priestleys father Gordon Priestley died in Brewarrina Hospital on February 19, 2012 without them by his side as the NAB refused to adjourn the possession proceedings, the NAB still tried to get possession on February 20, 2012 even after the court had been advised of Gordon Priestley’s death. Their father’s dying wish was for them to fight it to the end, as it was Gordon Priestley who had acquired this land the NAB were so determined to take from them. 

1n 2012 the Priestley's tried to get their defences heard, however with minimal legal advice this was not possible and the court gave default judgment to the NAB. They have never had their day in court with the NAB always successfully having their amended defences struck out. 

In December 2012 the Priestley's applied to the Court to have a Stay granted on the writs of possession and a new defence, based on the breach of contract due to the Code of Banking Practice being bound by a secret contract causing the contract to be misleading and deceptive. Justice Garling refused their application even though his Judgment says:What [the Priestley's] have put before the Court on this application is certainly deserving of close attention by the senior management of the NAB, because if the Priestley's are correct, and their complaints have not been listened to and dealt with appropriately, then the NAB may well be exposed to both, damage to its reputation and as well, suggestions that its publicity campaign which describes itself as "the leading Agri-Business bank" may not have any substance. 

The NAB went ahead with eviction on January 31, 2013 knowing the Judgment was very wrong, knowing they had breached the contract. Two Sheriffs, two body guards, two locksmiths removed them from their home. The NAB took their land and their net asset worth $5million in 2004 leaving them homeless and with a toxic name. This is not the bank for all seasons. As the biggest agribusiness lenders they could have renegotiated the loans to utilize the turn around in seasons from 2010 onwards. The attached article features an interview with Shane Dowton the manager who refused to look at a cotton budget in 2010, he is now saying how farmers are moving on because their reservoirs are full. The Priestley's have lost 4 cotton crops due to Shane Dowton not cooperating with them.

An expert report comments on the NAB inaction: The net operational surpluses that could have been realised if operating capital had been forthcoming to the River Staation Partnership from 2009 until the present time is in the order of $3.67 million for grain enterprises and $5.42 million for the irrigated cotton enterprise. In total these equate to a figure of $9.09 million [with supplementary income obtainable from a 5,000 hectare grazing enterprise].

This is not an insignificant amount and one that … would have been sufficient for the River Staation Partnership to meet its obligations with financiers and other creditors, pay down debt levels and allow it to progress to a more secure basis of operating into the future with greater equity. 

In May 2013 The Priestley's tried to appeal the Garling Judgment by themselves but were refused leave to appeal. At no stage has the NAB lawyers ever had to answer the serious allegations made by the Priestley's. All they have ever done is present a Statement of Claim to the court, without  even presenting to the court a copy of the 2008 contract that they rely on. The Priestley's have not had their day in court due to ridiculous errors of laws that have had nothing to do with the truth behind the misleading contracts the NAB inflicted on them. 

Now their farms are being advertised for sale by tender. The farms have not been presented to gain proper market value, no wheat crops, no water in the 200 acre reservoir. When water was available to pump the designated agent claimed the Macquarie water licences cant be used if there is flood water in the river, thus potential buyers will not be guaranteed of this seasons cotton crop, obviously an agent not capable of properly marketing this prime agricultural property. Underselling these farms appears to be the priority.

It is a crime to let agricultural land is Australia sit for four years not producing when global food shortage is such a problem at present.

To read more

Last modified on Friday, 26 July 2013     
Claire PriestleyI am a farmer, the NAB made us homeless, unlike this CBA victim, the NAB didn't offer us any rental assistance just penalty interest rates even after they took possession., unlike the farmers at the moment being screwed due to drought, the NAB launched their attack on us after they had sucked up all the Government drought interest Subsidies and when the drought broke and we could repay the debt they refused to finance crops such as cotton. They lent to us in the drought then kicked us off in the best season in ten years, making a lot of money from our loan in interest, but they ensured we were homeless.
Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:


  • doyla66
    doyla66 Monday, 24 March 2014

    Disgusting and appalling

    Looks like criminal conduct and legal malpractice, in our unqualified opinion.
    Where will the Priestley's find an honourable legal firm to take this to true justice for them pro bono, in the interests of the entire world? Probably have to engage an international firm to get decent treatment and suitable compensation for this travesty.
    This country is run by lawyers - wouldn't you think any one of them could offer assistance without consideration of how much money they or their mates could make for themselves?
    Or would they rather sit on their sinecures in Canberra a long way from the suffering and negotiate the offselling of the Commonwealth of Australia to overseas investors?

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Monday, 24 March 2014

    So much of the Priestleys story is a repeat of our own. Both the Priestly's and us have been Nabbed good and proper. The Nab legals are so smug in court. The judges are scared to buck the system and almost protective of Nab. You just feel like you are sinking in Nab waters with the Nabsters holding a hand over your mouth, in other words drowning in fraud and illegal practices. Our home has now been sold and as of today we still do not know the outcome. The interest keeps building each month. Slack b.....ds cant even organise the final figures. Now we are having to contend with the thugs and bullies who have purchased our home. These low lifes are helping themselves to anything they want from our leased property which adjoins our lost home property. Thieves and shysters.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Monday, 24 March 2014

    disgusting and appalling, unaustralian and UNBELIEVABLE!.. then again, not so unbelievable now that we know that we borrowers have been scammed all along, thanks to BFCSA and Denise Brailey.

    No one inside one bank department knows what the other one are doing... eg. today I received a greetings card from RAMS stating "Happy Loan Anniversary" !!...

    Our maladministration in lending complaint against RAMS is with FOS and we have not paid RAMS a cent for 2 years whilst under investigation and we have been living in our home.

    RAMS is playing games and stalling proceedings so that the interest just keeps piling up. RAMS has put a proposal to us which could have been put to us 2 years ago if they had of agreed to meet with us, and we would have gotten on with our lives instead of living in limbo.

    Now the $280K maximum compensation that FOS currently has as it's terms of reference is all eaten up by RAMS stalling tactics. RAMS claw back our home and we are left with nothing.. not even reimbursed the hundreds of thousands of dollars we have paid over the years to RAMS in good faith. We should never have been approved in the first place.

    Banks cannot profit from a FRAUD... yet they have been allowed to do so for years... and are still at it !

    Now we know, what you banksters have been up to... now I would like to know what Mr Abbott et al will do about it to make things right ... past and present wrongs?

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Monday, 24 March 2014

    Much as we would like to believe the Government can or will assist us, the reality is the probably neither are true.
    If we have to look after ourselves then somehow we have to band together, put as much money as we can together, and thrash the banks at their game at Law. All our cases are Fraud cases, by the sounds of it, thus the police in each state should be assisting. As far as what help we can expect from the Federal law enforcers, it would depend on whether they're contracted to the Australian Government or the Commonwealth of Australia, for the protection and defense of the people of Australia. Then it would depend on whether they're jurisdiction/job description includes the protection and defense of people like us. Collective efforts are most effective, according to recent research. The upshot is that we may end up with the military forces and military police looking after us under those conditions. Don't bother the white collar workers - we don't fit their schedule as individuals, despite what's implied on their websites. We researched all those as well. The Salvos, Lifeline and some community agencies may assist to a point but not with the serious crime nature of our cases. Legal Aid will run for cover, apparently. And, yes, there are some truly fabulous lawyers who are ethical, honest and willing to assist if you're lucky enough to find one. Sorry if this sounds bleak - that's the latest information we have from around the country. Hoping and praying that maybe some Senators could decide to get their contracts rewritten to better empower them to assist the people of Australia, as their FIRST call of duty, and just forget about parties, politics, areas of interest, state boundaries, and any other restrictions normally placed on their effectiveness. We need them onside without limitation asap. to influence the Lower House Urgently

Leave your comment

Guest Wednesday, 30 September 2020