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.


Senator Mark Bishop – Economics Committee Inquiry into the performance of ASIC

From Senator Mark Bishop

From: “Liau, Marie (Sen M. Bishop)” <>
Date: 13 May 2014 8:54:04 AM AEST
Subject: Economics Committee Inquiry into the performance of ASIC
Dear Mr XXXThank you for your email recently received in our office and it has now been forwarded to the Economics Committee for consideration.As you are no doubt aware, the committee are due to table their report into the performance of ASIC on 30th May, 2014.  A copy of the report and its recommendation will then be available at

Kind regards


Marie Liau

Office of Senator Mark Bishop

Perth tel: (08) 9472 6177 | fax: (08) 9472 6200
Canberra tel: (02) 6277 3101 | fax: (02) 6277 3123
mobile: 0488 914 221 | email:

—– Forwarded message from XXXX —–
Date: Tue, 6 May 2014 12:57:08 +0800
Subject: Enquiry Posted by XXXX to the Senator Mark Bishop
Contact Form

Dear Sir/Madam,

This is the information that was submitted:

First Name           : XXX
Last Name            : XXX
Email Address        : XXXX
Telephone Number     : XXXX
Message              : We must have a ROYAL COMMISSION immediately
into the fraudulent activities of the banks.
: We have been conned & deceived by the
Application documents, in both 2005 and 2007.
: Our Loan Application Documents have been the
target of ‘Document Tampering, forgery & fraud.’
: Income figures were grossly inflated & many
other details,including false vehicles & shares, were altered & added
AFTER we had signed a couple of pages of the LAF.
: This is a  systemic, criminally fraudulent
business practice used by the CBA (and many other banks & lenders),
: where they corruptly lend money using grossly
falsified Loan Application Documents  (that we had never seen),
: & conspiring with Mortgage Brokers (that we
have never met), & going through Finance Companies (that we didn’t
know about & have never dealt with), with the sole aim of the Bank
being able to take our family home.
: (Asset Lending).
: Then the bank tries to cover it all up,
refuses to supply copies of the Loan Application Documents,
: –  CBA employee Quote:  ” We can’t give you
copies as it would leave the bank open to prosecution.”
: After 3 years of trying, I have all the other
documentation, including the falsified Loan Application Documents.
: They were fraudulently falsified in our 2005
loan and even more seriously in our 2007 loan re-finance.
: Fortunately for us they were dumb enough to
send us the 1st set of grossly altered documents – by mistake!
: I have also discovered that the bank (or their
agent) even used FAKE Low doc declarations that they photoshopped/ cut
& pasted together to get around the normal loan policies!  I also have
copies of these.
: One of the most shocking things about this is
that the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS) -who are supposed to
protect the public from illegal or unethical banking practices – has
disturbingly decided that : even though the bank may have known that
the documentation was false – THE BANK WAS ENTITLED TO RELY ON THAT
: The FOS are blatantly biased in favour of the
Banks. They have ignored key documentary evidence & overlooked much of
the fraudulent information.
:  My wife and I even discussed the possibility
of 2 of the FOS investigating officials being bribed, such was our
level of disbelief at the way they were constantly trying to justify
the Bank’s actions!
: At one stage, they stated that the bank would
have known that the income details had been falsified as we were
receiving Family Assistance so therefore could not have been earning
the income stated on the loan application, and were suggesting that
the Bank should enter into a settlement conference and were waiting
for the Bank to respond.
: The next letter we had from the ombudsman was
the final decision – in favour of the bank!
: Even more sinister the ombudsman also put in a
clause stating that : if we accept the decision that we were to agree
not to take any further action against the bank!  This is how they try
to protect the Banks, they are certainly not protecting the public
against this fraud.
: We also recently received a copy of a letter
from FOS to the CBA- which was deliberately with-held from us, stating
that FOS’ Legal Counsel agreed that the CBA WAS GUILTY of
: We were actually advised by one of the FOS
Investigating Case Managers who realised that important matters in the
investigation were being covered up in favour of the bank, to go to
the State & Federal Police to make an official complaint against them
for fraud, which is what we have done.
: The Australian Federal Police and the CRIMINAL
INVESTIGATIONS BRANCH are now investigating both the CBA and the
brokers for Criminal Fraud.
: The CIB Detectives have issued warrants on the
CBA trying to get the ORIGINAL documents, but the CBA have responded
by stating that the original documents would have been destroyed.
: We are now at the stage where we arranged
meetings with our local MP  Karen Andrews, & took copies of the
documents to show her.  She agreed that fraud was evident & agreed
that we should make a formal complaint with the police.
: We also have the full support of Mr. White, of
the National Federation of Independent Business.
: This widespread fraud must be stopped.
: It is a crime against the Commonwealth, it is
a crime against all the People of Australia.
: The bank executives must be held accountable
for instigating this fraud & allowing the corruption to continue.
: Fraud is a criminal offence, therefore they
must be prosecuted to the full extent of the Law.
: We have written over 50 letters to the CBA CEO
Ian Narev and all of the other Directors, and we have sent Formal
Claims, by registered post, to all the CBA Board of Directors
individually, but they have not responded to us except to try & drag
us into a long & expensive legal battle by saying: “We will only
respond to you through a Lawyer.”
: Interestingly, they also haven’t denied or
rebutted our allegations of fraud,- because they know that we have the
documentation, in black & white, that proves this fraud.
: yours sincerely,

Message End.

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)