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!"

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: FOS, COSL, APRA and ASIC must heed REGULATION OF FAIRNESS: How to AVOID sub prime low doc mortgage scams

Posted by on in Corrupt Regulators
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 3872
  • Print

FAIRNESS IN LENDING as a revered regulation and policy of Government that could have stopped the greed of Major Banks, had it been properly applied.  

Government could have stopped the fraudulent Loan Application Scams that has been taking place inside the Banking Machine of Australia.  

TO FOS, COSL, APRA and ASIC - why did you not think of this?

To adhere to regulations relating to FAIRNESS in FINANCIAL PRODUCTS AND SERVICES:

1.  It is most unfair to have a banker seconded TO FOS from a Major Lender to adjudicate and view a client file who is a complainant of any of the Lenders..........................and please tell us who dreamed that one up??????

2.  The statue of limitations is six years from when the awareness is evident, so please cease using that as an excuse to close files and treat consumers of banking products with  contempt.

3.  The statue of limitations is UNLIMITED in cases of FRAUD except for two states where statute is 20 years.  NO excuse for closing files before that period has expired......all of those investigations must be re-opened and properly dealt with for the sake of the Banking Industry generally as it is the only collection of data to show abhorrent patterns emerging caused by SELF REGULATION, big money handling and the obvious and expected greed of Bankers.

4.  All victims from NSW were covered since 1980 by the Contracts review Act as per the High Court so cases closed in those instances must be RE-OPENED.

5.   Cases cannot be closed as a special purpose initiative to COVER up BAD LENDING PRACTICES

Until such times as all of the above is adopted and practiced THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF FAIRNESS in Banking, in Australia.

BFCSA Members wish every Banker involved in SUB PRIME LENDING an UNHAPPY NEW YEAR and,



It is critical for YOU during that most important first year to ensure, NO FRAUD TAKES PLACE.

Our design is to set the rules by which Banks have to play with BFCSA FAIRNESS and together we will achieve that which four regulatory bodies have been able to achieve.   Fraud is rife.  100% of LAFs we have investigated are fraudulent, rendering the loans TOXIC. 

To all our members, we offer more solutions to push forward in the New Year and including our resolve to RE-OPEN all files for a CLASS ACTION.

This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. 



Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:


  • doyla66
    doyla66 Friday, 27 December 2013

    Bashing head against brick wall

    From a site called justanswer re australian law – lawyer clueless AND an Australian lawyer - 1 year on still no answer!

    Customer Question
    How can I get a mortgage Securitisation Audit done in Australia and how do I file a 'quiet title' suit here. Thank you
    Submitted: 1 year ago.
    Category: Australia Law

    Law Expert: Replied 1 year ago.
    Good Evening, I have read your question and would like to assist you but the terminology you are using is not familiar to Australian lawyers. Can you please explain to me what you are attempting to do in simple terms so that I can ascertain if it is available in Australia? I understand it relates to mortgages but I do not understand what you are seeking.

    Customer reply: 1 year ago (courtesy of an RBA factsheet explanation) \
    Securisation Audit: Most if not all, residential mortgages (negotiable instruments) are 'securitised' these days, that is, the 'promise to pay' is bundled with other loans into what is called a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV or Trust, commonly known as RMBS or Residential Mortgage Backed Security in Australia) which is then purchased by groups of investors via those trusts. This process of converting a loan to shares irrevocably changes the nature of the loan and the standing or rights over the property/title. A Securitisation Audit is a forensic discovery process to determine 1) if the loan has been securitised and the name of the trusts it is now linked to 2) if the title/mortgage has been separated from the loan (bifurcation - flawed secularisation) 3) who is the real/legal holder or owner of the note on the property - is it the lender or the shareholders 4) if there is a broken chain of title it may show that a lender trying to foreclose is no lender at all, but a servicer for a broken securitized mortgage.

    Quiet Title Suit (not a Quiet Title Action): A quiet title suit is also called a suit to remove a cloud. A cloud is any claim or potential claim to ownership of the property. The cloud can be a claim of full ownership of the property or a claim of partial ownership, such as a lien in an amount that does not exceed the value of the property. A title to real property is clouded if the plaintiff, as the buyer or recipient of real estate, might have to defend her full ownership of the property in court against some party in the future.

    Law Expert: Replied 1 year ago.
    Good Morning, I am sorry I am unable to assist here. I will opt out and hopefully another expert can assist

    Customer:replied 1 year ago.
    So will another expert pick up the thread or do I have to do it again?

    Law Expert: Replied 1 year ago.
    Good Morning, I hope so, it depends on them being able to answer.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Friday, 27 December 2013

    PS to above

    Explanation of Quiet Title Suit from a Legal Dictionary!

  • Denise
    Denise Friday, 27 December 2013

    RMBS Packs are Income Streams

    Hi Organza, Our securitisation program differs from the USA. Bankers securitised THE INCOME STREAM here in Australia. Do not trust all articles on this issue. [email protected]

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Friday, 27 December 2013

    Mickovski v Financial Ombudsman Service Limited & Anor [2012] VSCA 185

    The (VIC) Court of Appeal decided that FOS erred in law when.. deciding the complaint was lodged out of time"..

    FOS Decision
    The FOS Terms of Reference prevented FOS from dealing with complaints where the complainant knew or should reasonably have known of all the relevant facts more than six years before first notifying the complaint. Mickovski argued the 2007 rectification of the SCI policy and Metlife's 2008 denial of the reinstatement claim both constituted relevant facts. FOS decided that neither was a relevant fact, and declined jurisdiction on the basis that the complaint was lodged out of time. The decision was affirmed in a review by FOS's Panel Chair.

    Appeal Decision
    Mickovski sought judicial review of FOS' decision or, if judicial review was unavailable, a declaration that FOS had breached its contractual obligations to Mickovski to comply with its Terms of Reference.

    Breach of Contract
    The Court of Appeal decided that FOS erred in law when construing its Terms of Reference, by misinterpreting the nature of the "relevant facts" that must be known before the limitation period commenced. According to the appeal court, a "relevant fact" was one that "rationally affected the way in which [Mickovsky] might have behaved if he had been aware of it". Applying that test, the 2007 rectification of the SCI Policy was a relevant fact that became known by Mickovski only one year before lodging the complaint. "FOS therefore erred in deciding the complaint was lodged out of time."

    Last Updated: 16 January 2013
    However please note the Court stated it cannot intervene in FOS cases.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Friday, 27 December 2013

    Is it correct that ex Bank Managers are FOS Case managers.??? You would think this is a good move because they would understand the rorts within the lenders institutions. NOT SO I say after having an ex banky investigate our case. To busy patting himself on the back about his background I found. Strange how things work really. He was of little help I found and failed to answer any questions asked of him. We offered to purchase our home back again at his direction. We did, but never heard a word from Nab or him. Still have copy of the letter and when it was forwarded.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Friday, 27 December 2013

    Thanks Denise. Had hoped when I sent the comment somebody would enlighten me for it was not my query but something I found when trying to figure out what was going on before lucking onto the BFCSA site. Had forgotten I even still had it in an email folder until this morning when doing a cleanup. Must be countless others doing as I had been trying to fly solo when I thought the only problem I had was input ifo. re property details and land size incorrect input and getting nowhere and banging my head then against brick walls and trying to filter through what was useful inf. and what was rubbish. Sure hope whoever did lodge that query got lucky and is now a member for I cannot bear thinking of all those helpless people who have probably given up and the countless others with not a clue they are even able to attempt to fight them and well they who are as cunning as S H rats know this for that is exactly what they bank on and how able thus far to get away with it!

  • Denise
    Denise Saturday, 28 December 2013

    Thanks Andy. I read the document. Judge simply says he thinks the stand that FOS is taking re six year limit is wrong. But the case was actually whether a court can intervene in a FOS decision that is wrong and, THE COURT CANNOT INTERVENE. Please do not take out of context as it does not help our cause at all. [email protected]

Leave your comment

Guest Wednesday, 20 January 2021