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

Brokers are AGENTS OF THE BANKS. Judges agree. Obligations transferred from Bank to Broker under AMLCTF Act

Posted by on in Corrupt Regulators
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 4445
  • Print

When brokers say they will get you a "loan" and they won't charge you anything, then they are obviously working for the banks as they get a commission. I can't see how the banks can say that the brokers were not working for them or on their behalf. Have I missed something?


ED:  Spot on PT,  but the Prime Minister has hasn't yet worked out who pays commission to the brokers.  He is a smart man, so he obviously has not been briefed by Treasurer Joe Hockey, on the Banks ignoring the fact they have a very important responsibility to ensure ID Verification under the Anti Money Laundering and Counter Terrorism Financial Act 2001.  Banks ask Brokers to sign a Statutory Declaration to Verify the Borrower and collect personal financial details and ID documentation.  Banks must comply with those legal requirements.  All Brokers must sign the STAT DEC and then hand the document over to their Bankster Masters.  

Since the Banks pay the Brokers for this particular task (and other things) then the Broker is indeed the Agent of the Bank.  More importantly Banks are passing on their own statutory obligations onto the Broker Agent.

The Commission structure places the brokers in conflict of looking after interests of the proposed bank client and that of the Bank Masters.  If you look at the Schmidt case in VIC, the Judge states the idea of the conflict and the fact of the Broker being the Agent of the Bank.

At least three cases, demonstrate some Judges have caught on to this Agency issue.  Will ASIC take a case to court and test this as well?  Hopefully not, as they would stuff it up and err on the side of their Bankster Mates.  This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Last modified on
Rate this blog entry:


  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    This is the new standard letter for FOS cases. I have seen several of them in a few days, still awaiting my own.

    "The broker was your agent. (That's all. No reasoning.)
    "The Financial Service provider did not engage in maladministration in lending." (The broker was banned by ASIC for 6 years on the grounds of this very LAF plus 5 others. LAF completely fraudulent. NSW mortgage where Contract Review Act applies.)
    "The applicants remain liable to repay the loan."
    "Please note that this Determination is final and there is no provision in our terms of reference for this Determination to be re-examined or amended in any way"

    The applicants are 68, he is a Vietnam War Veteran, soon to be homeless.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    Go back in the blogs. There is a lot on whose agent the broker is.
    The broker "sourced the customer and completed and processed the application forms".
    That is the wording of the agency agreements the banks have with the originators.
    The broker is the next degree of separation, but the broker did precisely what the agency agreement with originator says and most likely the broker did the ID verification which clearly makes him/her an agent of the bank.
    No one gets the ID verification document with their LAF because it proves the broker was the agent of the bank.

    Hard to believe this is possible in Australia.

  • Denise
    Denise Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    Yes Indeed Gladiator. I spent time writing The Argument of Agency ( a paper for FOS & ASIC) and discovered the existence of the ID Verification Statutory Dec signed by the Broker as a statutory legal requirement/ obligation owed by the Bank under the AMLCTF Act meaning the Broker is the AGENT OF THE BANK. I also noted that in most earlier LAFS ( we have copies) pre 2005, look closely It has Boxes for AGENTS NUMBER and all Brokers around Australia were registered by banks as authorized Agents........of THE BANK. I started to complain to ASIC 2003 and by 2004 and 2005, hey presto banks said "broker not our agent , then told Broker "BUT you are our "business partner......." AND on the bank circus goes, wheeling out trick after lousy trick - all of which is WHITE COLLAR CRIME. The Banksters know we are on to them, so are relying on political mates.......................and ASIC mates to protect their interests at the expense of Consumers. I think the Senators have had enough! So have the Consumer Victims of Bank Fraud. [email protected]

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014


    So if the broker did it , you dont stand a chance.
    What a croc........ But the bank signed off on it......crikey!
    It was a Broker who orchestrated my loans as agent of the Bank.
    BUT it is the Banks who owed me a duty of care because I am a client of the bank.
    This is an insane letter FOS are writing. I have no doubt DB will place this also very ridiculous situation in front of the Senators. FOS has 30,000 complaints right now, high turnover of staff and are collapsing at every corner....doing weird unethical and perhaps illegal moves.
    How the hell is this big fat mess going to be fixed?
    They will have no choice but to reopen cases, freeze toxic loans and compensate us all.
    What a mess. This will take many many years to fix.
    I hope senators have enough sense to employ DB to help design a whole new finance system rather than try to repair the current train wreck banking and finance system!!!

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    With the new Determination regime FOS can do what they like. No grounds given on points they choose not not to elaborate on, complete injustice, but we have no way of doing anything about their determination.
    I suspect this is unconstitutional. You would expect this in a fascist country. Any lawyers out there?
    30 days to take it or leave it. If you say no the bank sends you a letter you have 28 days to commence repayment or to put your home on the market. Then they foreclose!

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    Denise, would you please post up your paper on the argument of agency once more for newer members?

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    Wonder how they would get around this argument if they were presented my case,you see the introducer i.e broker, and the Mortgage Manager are one in the same.His companies received the commissions,then gave the third party introducer crumbs.
    Now wouldn't that put the cat among the pigeons.
    Any lawyer that takes up this fight for us would make a killing,problem is finding one that will be able to out smart the banks lawyers.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    Same in my case. Will post up the determination when I have it.
    Problem is they say they have taken all you said into consideration and determine the broker was your agent. No more! The Determination is final with no possibility of arguing your case. You can then only go to court - or to the wall more likely. You see they have done away with having to get around a good argument. They determine. That's it! If you think it's it's wrong go to court, case closed.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    Still getting newer members Denise and no systemic problem (oh yeh)

    My FOS Case Manager said just the other day to me that they were aware how bad LOW DOC lending was but it doesn't happen anymore, I just laughed and asked if he lived in a cave or something because they are still advertising those products on TV now.
    He seemed genuinely amazed, I told him to just watch TV they are back to advertising no deposit, no paperwork home loans with just $3000 dollars down, all the same old dirty tricks.
    Now it has caught my eye that there are still new people such as Gladiator coming on board every day (welcome sorry you have to be a member of this club) with this new line of advertising and no changes in regulation Denise will be a required service to a whole new group in another toxic 4 - 5 year period.
    There is an outward brazenness in the way our Banks are showing disregard for authority and not shutting down products which are toxic and unscrupulous so your work will never be done Denise.

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    But they accept that in low doc lending the bank did not have to check the info on the LAF. No maladministration because the bank was entitled to rely on the information provided to them. Truly, they have standardized the argument. I am in despair!

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    I also am in despair! Still not lodged my FOS claim - still delving hrough paperwork trying to find what I need due to ANZ refusing to provide all the missing pages - still not found the last taxation return I gave to the Broker - all paperwork shoved in storage boxes when I moved after house sold - not all I own stored where I am now living NIGHTMARE. In my case the broker cased me - did all needed - faxed to ANZ - then called to say loan approved and to take all paperwork when it arrived in the mail to a local ANZ branch to sign which I did BUT I took to a different branch (one I dealt with) rather than where told to take to. Of course the Bank Manager was delighted to sign - probably gave him unexpected bonus! No further involvement from the Broker after the call to say approved in 2006. Hard yakka trying to nab cockroaches but you can if you persist!

  • doyla66
    doyla66 Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    What about if the Broker did not complete a LAF? The Broker received .5% commission ongoing which was the only document we ever signed for the Broker. Even that was dodgy because there were 4 applicants and only 1 signed. Nab spent weeks looking for something that was never there. "Extensively searching" was the phrase Nab used. The Broker applied, supplied business plans, received approval and all emails were directed to him. How does that work when he didn't complete a LAF on our behalf. Oh Yes, thats how it goes. He was a buddy of the Nab loan assessor and played golf with him forgot that minor detail, as well as he had been a Nab bank manager so knew the drill no doubt. Wolves in sheep clothes.

  • Denise
    Denise Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    Most cases BFCSA has looked into to date there are sinister patterns emerging: Most people only recall seeing three pages to sign and all other pieces of the 11 page form were added and filled in later by either banks or brokers or both. Some have three people's writing on the document - after they signed and without the borrower's knowledge or authority. No-one I know of signed "blank forms" as the broker/staffer had pre-written int he details or people would never have signed. Yet now FOS managers are trying to suggest "you signed a blank form." This is Bank Lawyers like Gadens using a case known as LONGOBARDI. Stick to the truth of what happened to you at the point of signing (PRE APPROVAL) do not allow FOS or COSL to intimidate you. Speak the TRUTH and stand by your guns!!! This is a vicious crime scene indeed. I cannot believe the trickery by FOS, COSL, ASIC and the Banksters. [email protected]

  • Denise
    Denise Wednesday, 12 February 2014

    For all cases histories go to O'DONNELL; Michael & Karen COOK; KHOSHABA; VAN DENBERGH (wa); SCHMIDT; KOTEVSKI; there are a few of them now....all winners against the banks; [email protected]

Leave your comment

Guest Saturday, 27 February 2021