News report on CBA, ASIC, FOS, POLICE Fraud cover up

CBA Fraud Given Green Light by Industry Watchdogs & Law Enforcement

It appears actual physical evidence of fraud no longer matters to the Queensland Police, Federal Police, ASIC or even the Financial Ombudsman Service when it comes to the big banks. 

By General Maddox. 

(Real News Australia) What you’re about to read below is sadly not a unique case. There are dozens, if not, hundreds of similar cases just like this one around the country. Honest hardworking people battling their way through life like the rest of us. Buying a home, starting a business and doing what it takes to make ends meet. However, in this case it appears that not only did a mortgage broker but also Australia’s biggest bank colluded to ensure that stress, hardship and debt enslavement was the order of the day.

XXX and his wife XXX moved from New Zealand back in 2004 to start a life here in Australia. They decided in early 2005 to contact Mortgage Choice to arrange finance to finish building a home and to start a new business. The evidence has shown that the broker was acting as an agent for the Commonwealth Bank of Australia (CBA) and arranged a line of credit to the tune of $389,000. Later it was discovered that the broker had actually applied for $540,000 without the knowledge, or consent mind you, of XXXX or Carol.

Then in early 2007 hard times fell upon Mr & Mrs XXXX. The bills kept coming but the income wasn’t quite there to match it. They decided to seek the assistance of the CBA and restructure the loan into something more manageable. A $300k home loan and capped line of credit of $70k was established. For a time this worked and was indeed manageable. However, in early 2009  there were issues keeping up with mortgage repayments. XXXX & XXX were struggling to stay afloat. Again they asked for help from the CBA to see what could be done. An appointment was made in a Gold Coast branch of the CBA so they could sit down with a lending specialist to help sort out their dilemma.

As it turns out the dilemma hadn’t even begun.

As they sat with the lady from the CBA staring at her computer screen scrolling through the original loan application documentation, XXXX & XXXX were shocked. A feeling of disbelief swept over them. Right before their eyes they witnessed falsified loan documents form both the Mortgage Choice loan broker and the Commonwealth Bank of Australia. They witnessed:

XXXX was quick to ask for a print out of the documents he had just seen as proof of the fraud. The CBA employee refused saying that it would make the CBA liable and open to prosecution! She said they would have to discuss it with their broker. After weeks of calling the bank requesting copies of the loan documents and being refused, XXXX decided to write a letter to make a formal request for the documents from the first loan in 2005 touting freedom of information in the hope that the bank would give in.

To his surprise he received the paperwork by post 3 weeks later and was absolutely astonished to see ALL of the changes to the documents that were made without either XXXX or Carol’s knowledge or consent.

See the examples below of which XXXX has many, many more of… (click to view larger)

Falsified Docs6Falsified Docs7

The question is why would a bank & broker go to so much trouble to fraudulently change a loan application to make it appear that the applicant can adequately service the debt when they know all too well that they cannot and will almost certainly default on their debts?

The answer? Derivatives. Banks all around the world trade debt. As crazy as that sounds it’s actually big business for banks and financial institutions worldwide. They all trade debt to make more money. See this short video to better understand what i mean. (1:40)

XXXX’s next course of action was to visit a colleague by the name of XXXXXX of the National Federation of Independent Business, a small business advisory group. He went through the documents and gave XXXX advice to go back to the bank and sort it out internally. XXXX took the advice and requested the bank investigate the matter which when you think about it is like asking a murderer to investigate the murder of his own victim.The CBA of course said it had done nothing wrong and again instructed XXXX to go back to the broker.

XXXX decided to go one step further and went to ASIC to make a formal complaint. The response from ASIC was less than enthusiastic. Their initial response was not to investigate Mr XXXX’s accusations of fraud against the CBA. An outrageous response according to XXXX. He wrote back to try again and this time felt as if he had some success due a reply by a Mr Greg Hackett from ASIC stating they would review their initial response not to investigate.

XXXX was feeling as though he had started to make some progress and even called Mr Hackett to ask him personally if he required actual copies of the fraudulent loan application documents. “Not at this stage as i haven’t gotten around to reviewing your case as yet”, was his reply.

Then almost two months later came ASIC’s formal reply. Let’s just say that whatever little hope XXXX and XXXX had mustered was soon drained away.

ASIC’s enquiries did not reveal sufficient evidence…

…these enquiries have been unable to gather sufficient information…

XXXX & XXX were shocked. Shocked and now angered at the blatant disregard for the truth. ASIC openly stated that it didn’t have sufficient evidence and that they were unable to gather sufficient information when in fact they didn’t request any nor did they accept it when XXXX offered it up. Instead they suggested XXXX & XXX go through the Financial Ombudsman Service. In other words, ASIC wanted nothing to do with it.

Unsure where to turn next, XXXX again went to visit XXXX of the NFIB. XXXX began talking to the FOS to open a case for Mr & Mrs XXXX. Later down the track XXX had told XXXX that the FOS admitted ‘off the record’ to XXXX that a lot was being covered up and to go to the police and make a formal complaint! We’ll get to that shortly.

3 long years later the Financial Ombudsman Service had finally finished its investigation. After many sleepless nights XXXX & XXX were again hoping for good news. Sadly they were again disappointed. The system had again let them down. Unbelievably the FOS decision, after having been presented with all the fraudulent documents, all the proof it needed, all the proof anyone capable of reading the written word needed, was in favour of the bank!

Even more unbelievably during all the correspondence back and forth between the FOS, CBA and the Styles’, XXXX had mistakingly received a letter from the FOS legal department which openly stated it found out that the bank was guilty of mal-administration! Even with this letter from their own people, the FOS still found in favour of the CBA.

XXXX went back to XXXXX for more advice. Their next step was to contact Local MP Karen Andrews. After viewing all the evidence and the decisions by both ASIC and the FOS, Karen agreed the police should be involved.

XXXX went to Robina police station and met with an officer and provided all the documented evidence and made an official statement. After first hand experience knowing how long it took things to move he followed up about 2 weeks later to see how the case was progressing and was told by the same officer that the documents have gone missing! Another set of copies was provided a few days later and XXXX was then referred to the burleigh heads Criminal Investigation Bureau.

XXXX again tried to follow up on the progress and found out that warrants were served on the CBA to provide the original docs. But what comes next is the most shocking thing of all…

The CIB were informed by the Commonwealth Bank of Australia that they have destroyed the original documents! And even more shocking still… armed with this new shocking information the CIB declared it won’t investigate his case any further! 

The CIB told him it’s now a civil matter.

XXXX has hit a brick wall and is unsure of his next step. There are those of us out there that would simply walk away from this loan and not pay a single cent more. Especially considering that the bank no longer has the original loan documents.

No documents. No loan? Possibly.

XXXX has contacted a barrister on behalf of XXXX and may be able to sue the bank. XXXX has also written the CBA to say he wants the loans written off and is seeking compensation. He marked the letter to the attention of all standing directors of the CBA which has been totally ignored. Could XXXX have discovered the key to this all along? After all is it not true that the fifth maxim in Commercial Law is “AN UNREBUTTED AFFIDAVIT STANDS AS THE TRUTH IN COMMERCE”. Claims are made. If they go unchallenged, they emerge as the truth in the matter.






Westpac CEO Gail Kelly and Chairman Lindsay Maxsted are up to the neck in concealing fraud by staff at Westpac. I have the documents to prove it including internal bank emails and an email sent to me on Mrs Kelly’s behalf which is in effect an admission.  Both Gail Kelly and Lindsay Maxsted should be in jail for concealing a serious indictable offence.

The Westpac fraud is very similar in a lot of regards to the story this week on massive bank fraud by employees at the Commonwealth Bank which was on the  ABC’s Four Corners program this week called Banking Bad.

The Commonwealth Bank fraud has resulted in 1200 financial planning customers being compensated $50 Million for the fraud so far. In the Four Corners program a whistle-blower told the senate inquiry “I suspect a broader review is just going to uncover there are a lot more, like, you know, tens of thousands of clients who are probably entitled to compensation, and it’s never been looked at.” If you have superannuation which we all do it is a must watch or read the transcript. (Click here to watch or read) The Commonwealth Bank has used some very grubby tactics to conceal the fraud and harass people who complain as can be seen in a letter to Michael Fraser . The letter is from CBA executive John Geurts, is mostly broad and generalised, has very little specific detail and can be accurately described as nothing more than rambling dribble from a fool trying to intimidate. (Click here to read more)


Westpac made numerous multimillion dollar loans to Mario Girardo and were defrauded by him. At the time of Westpac making the loans Mario Girardo had no real assets, had three previous convictions for bank fraud and other frauds, was banned by ASIC from being a company director until 2007 and awaiting trail for kidnap and extortion which he was jailed for in 2011Yet the Westpac kept on lending him money.  The bank did eventually have him declared bankrupt as he was not paying his loan repayments but has refused to make a complaint to the police for fraud even though internal emails show they know that fraud has taken place.

In 2007 towards the end of Mario Girardo’s fraud spree Westpac put pressure on Patrick Hayes to do a joint deal with Mr Girardo to by a property. Mr Hayes did not know the background of Mr Girardo but the bank should have and highly likely did. The deal went bad as you would expect as Mr Girardo had no money and the bank instituted proceedings against both men. Mr Girardo was declared bankrupt and Mr Hayes is currently fighting in court as a self-represented litigant.

The documents and emails that I have relate to a 2006 fraudulent loan for $6.8 million from Westpac to Mr Mario Girardo which has nothing to do with Patrick Hayes. I wrote to Gail Kelly with the smoking gun evidence (Westpac’s own documents) and she had one of her staff respond and refused to take action. It is quite simple, if management have evidence of fraud against their company they have an obligation to report it to the police.

My email to Westpac CEO Gail Kelly

From: Shane Dowling [] 
Sent: Monday, 10 March 2014 12:11 PM
To: ‘’; ‘’
Subject: Westpac staff commit fraud – Involvement of Lindsay Maxsted

Dear Mrs Kelly

I am writing to you in relation to the fraud at Westpac that has been concealed by a number of Westpac employees. There is admission of the fraud in internal Westpac documents that are in my possession. The employees that have concealed the fraud include Chairman Lindsay Maxsted, John Murphy, Stuart Meager, Matt Sainsbury, and others.

If you look at attachment Westpac admit fraud it says:

“Please proceed against Girardo towards bankruptcy ASAP as it is obvious the bank has been subjected to some type of fraud in the original lend and loss will be significant.”

At the bottom of the attachment you will see a document from Allens Arthur Robinson lawyers explaining one element of how the fraud worked, which was getting an inflated property valuation so the purchaser could get an inflated and fraudulent loan.

Then if you look at attachment Westpac admit staff involvement in fraud where Westpac manager Greg McLachlan says in relation to the actions of Westpac employee Matt Sainsbury:

“whether there is a need for disciplinary action” and “It is concerning that the word of a non panel valuer and the purchaser have been given more credence then one of the Banks Panel Valuers especially given the very large difference between the two and it being an out of territory lending situation. The final two paragraphs of Shaynes email should also have been a clear warning supply of such accommodation was high and that some care in accepting the valuation provided was required.”

It is clear fraud had taken place and that Westpac had been defrauded. The fact that there has never been a complaint to the police for the fraud itself shows a cover-up by Westpac staff.

Matt Sainsbury’s conduct, which at best is disgraceful and at worst criminal, says there should have been a complaint to the police for fraud. Once again the fact there has been no complaint to the police shows a clear cover-up.

A highly likely hypothesis is that Mario Girardo bribed Matt Sainsbury and/or others at Westpac to get the $6.8 million loan and paid $5million for the unit and Mr Girardo pocketed the $1.8million balance. The original loan grew with further loans to $7.8 before Westpac sold the unit for $3.5 million and Westpac lost $4million and I am told Westpac lost another $11 million plus on other loans to Mr Girardo. It must be noted that Mr Girardo was on remand for extortion which was in the media at the time Westpac made a number of loans to him. He was also banned by ASIC from being a company director when some of the loans were approved by Westpac. Neither the ASIC banning or criminal charges facing Mr Girardo seemed to bother Westpac staff and they continued to loan him money.

What I find extremely disturbing is the two letters in relation to the same failing of Westpac to make a complaint to the police. One letter is written on behalf of the Westpac Chairman Lindsay Maxted (see attachment: Lindsay Maxted cover-up letterwhich clearly implicates him in the cover-up. The other letter is written by Gary Johnston is December 2011. (See Attachment:Gary Johnston Westpac cover-up letter)  The main relevant difference of the two letters is one line in Mr Johnston’s letter which says:

“The Queensland police also advised that there is no need for Westpac to lodge a complaint of its own at this stage, although it was open to Westpac to do so if it chose to

This line raises a few issues:

  1. It is not believable a police officer would say “there is no need for Westpac to lodge a complaint” given it was a $4million fraud. Can Mr Johnston name the police officer who gave that advice?
  2. If the police officer did say “it was open to Westpac to do so if it chose to” in relation to making a complaint then why did Westpac not make a complaint. Who at Westpac decided not to complain to the police in relation to the $4 million lost by Westpac from fraud by Girardo. Have Westpac sacked them? If not why not? It is so obvious a cover-up by Westpac staff.
  3. Westpac have a large legal team and external lawyers who were already looking at the issue and they would have known that they needed to make a formal complaint to the police given it was a $4 million fraud and as there was at the very least evidence that suggested that Matt Sainsbury was part of the fraud as the attachments show. Whether he was knowingly part of the fraud is something the police should have investigated.
  4. Why did Lindsay Maxsted leave the line out of his letter. Quite simply Mr Maxted would have known the line is a lie as it stands out a mile and that Westpac had an obligation to make a complaint of fraud to the police.

The above issues are currently part of a court proceedings involving Patrick Hayes. I am a journalist and investigate crime and to me the fact that the court proceedings are taking place is further evidence of the cover-up of the fraud. It is my understanding that counsel representing Westpac have already been caught deliberately misleading the court in evidence to try and cover-up the fraud.

Can you please advise what action you intend on taking and when you intend taking it. Do you intend calling the police and making a formal complaint and standing down Westpac staff until the matter is fully investigated?

I make a very serious allegation against Lindsay Maxsted in this email which is supported by the attached documents. Will you raise this allegation with the Westpac Board?

I look forward to your reply


Shane Dowling
Kangaroo Court of Australia

Gail Kelly’s letter (Click here for a PDF version which is better quality than below)

Gail Kelly Letter JPG

I have been told senior Qld Police are disgusted that Westpac will not make a formal complaint in relation to the fraud because Westpac’s own staff are involved. So what Paul Green says in the letter above on behalf of Gail Kelly is a lie and he fails to answer most of the questions that I asked. With a $4 million fraud you have no option but to make a complaint to the police as failure to do so is a criminal offence in itself. It is believed Westpac sacked at least two staff over the matter but even then failed to make a complaint to the police.

Other people have written to Gail Kelly before regarding fraud at Westpac and she palmed them off. This time I wrote to her with the banks own documents showing fraud at Westpac and she has also failed to take action and responded with lies to me. Gail Kelly and Lindsay Maxsted are the biggest fraudsters at Westpac and should be doing jail time. They are in effect ripping of millions of Australian’s who are customers and shareholders. The above would only be the tip of the Iceberg at Westpac.

Patrick Hayes  (self-represented) is back in the Supreme Court in Brisbane on Monday the 12th May 2014 in the matter Westpac Banking Corporation v Knight Property Investment NO.3 PTY LTD & another – Justice Peter Lyons – Court 20 – Floor 6 – 9.30 am. If you have time show up and support Mr Hayes. He is apparently up against 16 lawyers and barristers. Westpac are spending millions to have someone with no money declared bankrupt yet will not make a complaint to the police about a multimillion dollar fraud.

What to do: It is in everyone’s interest to have an honest banking system. The senate are currently investigating the Commonwealth Bank fraud and the chairman is senator Mark Bishop. Email Mr Bishop, the htreasure Mr Hockey and ASIC Chairman Greg Medcraft and Mrs Kelly and your local member demanding action by Westpac as per the draft below. I have just sent an email which is in the comment section below.


Dear Mr Bishop and Mrs Kelly

I request that you take summary action in relation to the fraud at Westpac bank etc. And copy the title of this post and first two paragraphs and put a link back. That makes it very difficult for them not to act.

The main reason Gail Kelly and other banks conceal fraud is not the fear of the cost of compensation although that is a concern. It is because they know a lot of their staff and their competitors commit fraud. So if they take action against their own staff for fraud it will send a signal to all staff to stop the fraud which will mean reduced sales and profit for the bank. And when profit is in the billions something as small as a 5% or 10% reduction can be a huge amount. Gail Kelly and others are happy to profit from fraud unless they are forced to stop it.



Australian Securities and Investment Commission – Senate Hearing Committee

Australian Parliament:   Senate Hearing Committee into the performance of corporate regulator ASIC - Australian Securities and Investment Commission

Held at Australian Parliament House over 3 days - Links to Schedule

(Transcripts will be added as they become available)

Public Hearings


The performance of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission

PUBLIC HEARING Wednesday 19 February 2014  Program Day 1

Corinthian Room, Sydney Masonic Conference & Function Centre (SMC), 66 Goulburn St Sydney



9.00 am

Australian Securities and Investments Commission
(Submission 45,  45_supp 45_supp245_supp2_correction45_supp3 )

Mr Greg Medcraft, Chairman
Mr Peter Kell, Deputy Chairman
Mr John Price, Commissioner

Mr Greg Tanzer, Commissioner
Ms Cathie Armour, Commissioner
Mr Greg Kirk, Senior Executive Leader, Strategy Group
Mr Warren Day, Senior Executive Leader Stakeholder Services and Regional Commissioner for Victoria
Mr Chris Savundra, Senior Executive Leader, Markets Enforcement

10.30 am


10.45 am


Australian Securities and Investments Commission

Mr Greg Medcraft, Chairman

12.00 pm

Institute of Chartered Accountants Australia (Submission 203) Mr Lee White FCA, Chief Executive Officer

CPA Australia (Submission 209)
Mr Alex Malley FCPA, Chief Executive Officer Mr Paul Drum, Head of Policy

1.00 pm


1.45 pm

Academic panel:

Professor Dimity Kingsford Smith (Submission 153)
Professor Justin O’Brien and Dr George Gilligan (Submission 121) Dr Suzanne Le Mire and A/Prof David Brown (Submission 152)

3.15 pm

Community and Public Sector Union (Submission 125) Mr Alistair Waters, Deputy National President
Mr David Mawson, CPSU ASIC Workplace Delegate

3.55 pm


4.05 pm

Financial Planning Association of Australia (Submission 234) Mr Mark Rantall, Chief Executive Officer
Mr Dante De Gori, General Manager Policy and Conduct
Mr John Bacon, General Manager, Professional Standards

Association of Financial Advisers (Submission 117) Mr Brad Fox, Chief Executive Officer
Mr Marc Bineham, Vice President

5.00 pm


Committee Chair: Senator Mark Bishop
PO Box 6100, Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Tel: +61 2 6277 3540 Fax: +61 2 6277 5719

Email: Internet:


The performance of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission

PUBLIC HEARING Thursday 20 February 2014 Program Day 2

Corinthian Room, Sydney Masonic Conference & Function Centre (SMC), 66 Goulburn St Sydney



9.00 am

Law Council of Australia (Submission 150)
Mr John Keeves, Chairman, Business Law Section
Mr Bruce Dyer, Member of the Corporations Committee, Business Law Section

10.00 am

Commonwealth Ombudsman (Submission 188)
Mr Colin Neave, Ombudsman

11.00 am


11.15 am

Financial Ombudsman Service (Submission 193)
Mr Shane Tregillis, Chief Ombudsman
Mr Philip Field, Lead Ombudsman, Banking and Finance

Credit Ombudsman Service

Mr Raj Venga, Chief Executive Officer and Ombudsman Mr Scott Goodison, Head of Dispute Resolution
Ms Allison Dam, Head of Policy and Compliance

12.15 pm


1.00 pm

Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees (Submission 136)
Mr David Haynes, Executive Manager, Policy and Research
Ms Karen Volpato, Senior Policy Adviser

Industry Super Australia (Submission 201)
Ms Robbie Campo

2.00 pm

Consumer Action Law Centre (Submission 120_att,  120)
Mr Gerard Brody, Chief Executive Officer (possibly via teleconference)

Consumer Credit Legal Centre (NSW) Inc (Submission 194)
Ms Karen Cox, Coordinator

3.00 pm


3.15 pm

Banking and Finance Consumers Support Association (Inc) (Submission 156_supp1,  156)
Ms Denise Brailey

4.15 pm


4.30 pm

Public hearing for the inquiry: Ticket scalping in Australia (until 5.30pm)



The performance of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission

PUBLIC HEARING Friday 21 February 2014 Day 3 Program Day 3

Committee Room 2S1, Parliament House Canberra



10.00 am

Mr Niall Coburn (Submission 282)

10.45 am


11.00 am

Professor Robert Baxt AO (Submission 189)

12.00 pm

Department of the Treasury

Ms Dianne Brown, Acting General Manager, Corporations and Capital Markets Division
Mr Bede Fraser, Manager, Intermediaries and Regulatory Powers Unit, Retail Investor Division

1.00 pm


1.45 pm

Public hearing for the inquiry: Tax Laws Amendment (Research and Development) Bill 2013 (until 4pm)