BFCSA Blog

The IMF Says Australia's Big 4 Get A Huge Government Subsidy And Need More Capital GREG MCKENNA APR 1 2014, 7:20 AM  BOOKMARK    24 A day after the first round of submissions were due to be given to the Murray Financial System inquiry comes a report from the IMF saying that banks which are deemed too-big-too-fail benefit from the implicit Government support that this status conveys. In the Australian context this means Australia’s major banks, (aka the Big 4 – ANZ, Commonwealth, NAB and Westpac) which Australia’s banking regulator, APRA, has already nominated as Domestic Systemically Important Banks (D-Sibs). While they don’t say how much the subsidy is worth, in Australia the IMF quantifies the value of the subsidy as “$70 billion in the United States, and up to $300 billion in the euro area”. If the Australian economy is about 11 times smaller than the economy of the United States, and most likely...

Transformation- Posted on Thursday, March 20, 2014  One of our readers:   People like Jon Denovan who have the benefit of both EDR/COSL experience and Law like to soften down the nasties of life - like Fraud, lying, common thievery. Many lawyers are like this. eg The 127 Law Firms involved in The Solicitor Mortgage Scams of the 90's and yes, ASIC did nothing, and $2 billion in losses.   Their justification? Conflict is expensive to client and so is court. Reality? They're of the breed of Australian men who get rattled by conflict and disputes and like life to run smoothly to their tastes and their benefit, of course. Push them hard enough and they can be quite nasty, but they will patronise you to death in the meantime, refusing to take you seriously. That's also why it takes so much effort to get some politicians to take this seriously...

1.  The Bank copy of the LAFs which were missing and never sent to Storm or the customers remained hidden despite a Senate Inquiry 2.   Banks Officers known as Business Development Managers BDM's frequented Storm offices - to teach Brokers how to use the CBA Service Calculator 3.  The Faxed copy of LAF from Bank (those who have secured their copy) differs from the originals. 4.  Only Brokers who kept their originals and ignored bank warnings to "shred the wet-ink LAF" have proof.  Proof the Broker was not the culprit 5.  Brokers are saying they were under instructions from Banks that ALL LAFs faxed to bank must have SERVICE CALCULATOR page and ICW (worksheet) attached to the LAF.   6.  Bank customers were told to sign  "we have read and understood everything" yet Banks only asked for three pages to be presented to all clients, knowing all other pages had...

Mackers just loves targeting Asset Rich but (very) Income Poor ("ARIPs") because its lucrative business for them and shareholders BUT its amoral and fraught with RISK OF LOSING HOME in 7 short years.  Low Docs guaranteed to lose your own home in 5 years.  The Bank Sharks are back.   THE ugly side of risks to reverse mortgages – interest rates are higher than average and debt can quickly rise.  Ask BFCSA Members what they think Reverse mortgages back in vogue Australian Broker News by Calida Smylie | 14 Mar 2014   The move by two major funders to offer reverse mortgages again is an indicator the market is picking up since the global financial crisis, the general manager of a mortgage servicing company said.“When reverse mortgages coming back that’s when I know the market’s coming back. Because funders willing to fund reverse mortgages means the cost of funding is coming down and they...

The Australian Securities and Investment Commission ("ASIC")  is under fire in a major way.  The gates are open for everyone to send in a submission and a second one if you so choose.  ASIC had three tasks: the regulation of financial products and service - banks were the engineers , consumer protection a priority and, consumer confidence in the market place - the world of Banking. End users of ASIC's services, for over a decade, have slam dunked ASIC's ability to master the art of consumer protection and consumer confidence.  The submissions show the regulator has failed on all levels.  The bleating of apologist Greg Medcraft as Chairman of this debacle are pointless at this late stage.  He had a chance to get tough and acted as a limp lettuce, pursuing instead, his own career ambitions as head of IOSCO.   His lordship spends his days on junkets around the world doing very little if anything, for consumers in Australia.   IOSCO has not held...

Dear Mr Neave.  We met in Melbourne in 2004.  At the time you were also the Banking Ombudsman (BAFSOL) from 1996 onwards to around 2008. This was the forerunner to FOS.  You recently became Commissioner for Information and now the Commonwealth Ombudsman.  Glory Be!  You ignored my pleas for investigations regarding Low Doc Lending, my concerns that Consumer Protection issues were being ignored.  You were also appointed as Commonwealth Consumer Affairs Advisory Council ("CCAAC") chatting at length with ASIC re spruikers etc and St George Bank implicated in dirty lending practices.   Wonder what your salary was for all these grand "positions."  Yes, sadly it appears you were happy to be paid to look in a different direction than that which would assist Consumers. Problem for you Colin is that you Sir, have left a trail of debris even I find hard to climb over.  We are now in receipt of...