Australian Broker forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Broker handed first NCCP conviction

Notify me of new replies via email
Australian Broker | 25 Jan 2013, 06:00 AM Agree 0
A former NSW mortgage broker has been handed the first conviction for contravening the NCCP
  • Garry | 24 Jan 2013, 03:36 PM Agree 0
    I totally applaud ASIC for taking rubbish brokers out of our industry like this. Keep it up ASIC.....
  • Curious | 24 Jan 2013, 03:39 PM Agree 0
    False information and documents? So basically fraud?

    Did he produce his own payslips?

    Would be nice to get a little more detail so noone else falls into the same trap.
  • Jo | 24 Jan 2013, 03:40 PM Agree 0
    With the importance placed on compliance, this guys only gets a 2 year good behaviour bond?
  • Mark | 24 Jan 2013, 03:45 PM Agree 0
    So just a good behaviour bond, no penalties no fines. Wouldnt see this as a harsh penalty. Sounds like he can continue on working, not really a penalty, just a little smack on the hand. So not quite how you read it Garry unfortunately. Chance to really set an example and this doesnt do that.
  • Country Broker | 24 Jan 2013, 03:46 PM Agree 0
    For 10 Counts and what is basically a FRAUD involving loans of $3m this bloke gets a slap on the wrist .

    Good on ASIC for prosecuting , he is still OUT of the industry and good riddance.
  • Mike | 24 Jan 2013, 03:46 PM Agree 0
    Good Behaviour Bond...what a joke.

    I thought ASIC were going to very tough on this type of behaviour and made various threats including substantial fines and even goal sentences.

    Until ASIC show some real teeth the doggie Mortgage Brokers and Bankers) will take calculated (i.e. financial) risks and we that remain will wear the stain.
  • Phil | 24 Jan 2013, 03:48 PM Agree 0
    A good behaviour bond for fraud.

    God help us, it's great he's no longer a broker, but our punishments for white collar crime is woeful. Seriously, $3,000,000 in fraudulent loans, and he gets a kick up the backside, and not allowed to work as a broker again.

    Seriously, something is fundamentally wrong with this, especially where there is 10 offences, so cannot be misconstrued as ignorance or an error / naivety.

    Everyone co-operates eventually when proof is on the table.... look at Lance Armstrong. The penalty doesn't make it a significant deterrent in my view.
  • Moonae | 24 Jan 2013, 03:49 PM Agree 0
    NCCP wouldn't have made a difference. It would have been captured under standard fraud. When someone gets done for breaches of responsible lending, ASIC can stick its chest out then.
  • VIC BROKER | 24 Jan 2013, 04:04 PM Agree 0
    Case by case basis!At least he will not be able to write any loans.To me this is the harshest penalty imposed on him!Some readers would appear to be amused had he been put behind bars? Strange!
  • Greg Marshall | 24 Jan 2013, 04:05 PM Agree 0
    With all the "huff & Puff" by ASIC the punishment for fraud doesn't fit the crime. Sounds typical of other criminal justice systems in the Country.
  • Ray-Perth | 24 Jan 2013, 04:17 PM Agree 0
    Hey, give ASIC a go folks. I am sure they want to move fast also, but the law has a tendency to take its time.

    Anyway it is the Courts who decide the penalty, not ASIC. I am sure there are people in ASIC who are just as disappointed in the good behavior bonds as we are. !!!

    Seriously I would prefer ASIC to be a bit cautious when under taking action like this rather than going in wildly with eyes half closed and kicking boots.
  • Kamran | 24 Jan 2013, 04:24 PM Agree 0
    "[Brokers] should know the law, read our guidance and seek additional or external advice if they feel they need it," ASIC commissioner Peter Kell said.’.
    So Mr. Kell really think those forging payslips, tax returns, statuary declaration, etc, etc, etc, just don’t know the law?
  • Sharon | 24 Jan 2013, 04:27 PM Agree 0
    This man was financially benefiting as a result of his deliberate and fraudulent actions. Apart from his obvious intent, he has likely placed customers in a position which they may not necessarily be capable of maintaining. His pursuit of personal financial gain should be dealt with severely irrespective of how he dealt with the situation after being caught.
  • Gold Standards | 24 Jan 2013, 04:28 PM Agree 0
    I am without full facts at hand, and relying on the accuracy of this media report, however on the basis of this report I would say the good behaviour bond is a smack in the face of articulate complying brokers. Daniel Nguyen of Panania has pleaded guilty to 10 offences relating to providing false information and documents to lenders to secure home loans totalling more than $3m. That is neither a small amount nor a one off ignorance offence. 10 offences is intent corruption in anyone's language. ASIC (and possibly MFAA) are inept in their governance duties in applying zero tolerance penalties for fraud for the 10 acts. This is a serious contemptuous joke on the industry
  • Tim | 24 Jan 2013, 04:52 PM Agree 0
    To the editors of Australian Broker maybe you could take the above comments by the law abiding hard working honest brokers to commissioner Kell for his opinion. This bloke committed fraud 10 times over. He broke the law. He gave the broking industry a bad name and all he gets is a wrap over the knuckles. This bloke tried it on, got caught, so said I am a naughty boy, please go lenient on me and ASIC and the courts obliged. ASIC should have really bared their teeth, co-operation by Mr Nguyen or not, and requested a more severe penalty by the courts.
  • Lyn Turner | 24 Jan 2013, 05:46 PM Agree 0
    If any reader is concerned that Mr Nguyen appeared to get off lightly - the drastic fines in the NCCP are still there - it just means ASIC only asked the court for a good behaviour bond. It will be very interesting to see whether or not ASIC continues to be so lenient.
  • John from Geelong | 24 Jan 2013, 05:48 PM Agree 0
    I presume that he didn't get the $3m, he received maybe $21k upfront plus the same i trail over 3 years.

    Plenty of people don't get custodial sentences for far more money than that.

    The fact he is out of the industry and cannot return is a satisfactory outcome.

  • John | 25 Jan 2013, 09:21 AM Agree 0
    Your have to read the article -
    "relating to providing false information and documents to lenders" It did not say he falsified the documents himself, and if others provided the information, and he UNDER NCCP did not make relevant enquiries or know his client..... Which makes more sense with, his co-operation, subsequent conviction and Bond. I for one would like to know what enquiries he failed to make, because spotting fraudulant documents or information may be impossible with very smart criminals.
  • D'Arcy - Qld | 25 Jan 2013, 10:33 AM Agree 0
    Unbelievable! A $3m fraud and all he gets is a smack & 2 yrs good behaviour bond! I see a newspaper article today about a bloke who threw a wipe at a nurse in a hospital and yelled some abuse and got a $1000 fine & 80 hours community service. The public will think this is a joke for not coming down tougher - a $3m fraud!!!!! A more severe penalty is warranted I feel to set an example.
  • Broke broker | 25 Jan 2013, 10:37 AM Agree 0
    I agree with John, we only know the documents the lender got (which ones?) were dodgy and so was some information. All of which could have been given by applicants with pretty good stories backing it up. Does NCCP now want us to get the 1000 watt light on our clients and interrogate them?
    We have to accept up until something is not right, that what information and their documents are on the level.
  • Kamran | 25 Jan 2013, 12:53 PM Agree 0
    John, the article reads ‘Former broker Daniel Nguyen of Panania pleaded guilty to 10 offences relating to providing false information and document to lenders to secure home loans totalling more than $3m.'. The article says Providing. Not failing to do enquiries. We have to do lots of extra paper work because of people who are in it for quick money at any cost to their peers and industry.
Post a reply