# Explain where money came from



## Jay1981 (8 Jan 2015)

Hi. We are going to go for a mortgage soon and bank asks us for 12 months bank statements on current account. We have saved up more than enough for a deposit but in March last year i got lucky and won an accumulator on horses and deposited the winnings (£5234 into my account. I don't want the bank to know how i got it because betting is a no no when applying for mortgage so is there any other way to explain where it came from.
Many thanks,
Jay


----------



## TTI (8 Jan 2015)

What exactly does it show on the statement?


----------



## Jay1981 (8 Jan 2015)

I put it in my account and and says the amount i deposited. We were at cheltenham last year.


----------



## TTI (8 Jan 2015)

Is it the same bank as where you want to apply for the mortgage? If so they could see where the transaction came from.


----------



## Steven Barrett (8 Jan 2015)

Jay

Online gambling is a big no no as it usually only shows money going out and never money coming in (people usually spend their winnings when betting online). 

Is there other evidence of you being at Cheltenham last year on your credit card statements, bank accounts e.g. flights, hotels etc? They won't expect you to go to Cheltenham and not have a flutter! Do you remember how much you put on to win the accumulator?


Steven
www.bluewaterfp.ie


----------



## seantheman (8 Jan 2015)

Jay1981 said:


> I put it in my account and and says the amount i deposited. We were at cheltenham last year.


 Can you not just say it was a birthday/anniversary/whatever gift from your family?


----------



## Jay1981 (8 Jan 2015)

Yeah. But will they ask for there bank account details if i say i got it from family.


----------



## losttheplot (8 Jan 2015)

Could you say you sold your car or your collection of rare batman comics.


----------



## Jay1981 (9 Jan 2015)

losttheplot said:


> Could you say you sold your car or your collection of rare batman comics.



Would they believe that. Don't want them hung up on this or should I wait till April and will be out of 12 months range.


----------



## mihaela (9 Jan 2015)

Jay1981 said:


> Would they believe that. Don't want them hung up on this or should I wait till April and will be out of 12 months range.


I wouldn't say so. I had to prove that for a 3k lodgement. And I was genuine! I had to wait for a letter from departament of transport in Shannon  to say my car has changed ownership and such and such date, and they were also looking for a print out of that ad on the Internet.  That was the only lodgement in my account apart from my wage. But maybe you are luckier! Fingers crossed.


----------



## Jay1981 (10 Jan 2015)

mihaela said:


> I wouldn't say so. I had to prove that for a 3k lodgement. And I was genuine! I had to wait for a letter from departament of transport in Shannon  to say my car has changed ownership and such and such date, and they were also looking for a print out of that ad on the Internet.  That was the only lodgement in my account apart from my wage. But maybe you are luckier! Fingers crossed.




Dam. Need to find a way around this.


----------



## PaddyBloggit (10 Jan 2015)

You had a garage sale and sold lots of bits and pieces on Done Deal. The trailer you sold was worth €1800 alone! And what about that vintage motorbike in the garage that you failed to restore. No documents ... 'twas a rebuild. That got you €500. You had a few kayaks that you needed rid of.  ................... etc. etc.

Surf Done Deal for a few imaginative ideas!


----------



## Jay1981 (10 Jan 2015)

Yeah. And believable.  Thanks


----------



## Boyd (11 Jan 2015)

Its such a joke..... You'd think they'd be more concerned with the outgoings! Tell them you sold bank shares!


----------



## Jay1981 (11 Jan 2015)

username123 said:


> Its such a joke..... You'd think they'd be more concerned with the outgoings! Tell them you sold bank shares!



I agree.


----------



## sonandheir (11 Jan 2015)

username123 said:


> Tell them you sold bank shares!



For that kind of money you could have been majority shareholder in some banks ;-)


----------



## Jay1981 (8 Feb 2015)

Filled out application form and sent off documents. Bank said they might need information down the road. What else could they want??
How long does an aib application take??


----------



## liger (8 Feb 2015)

Over a month. Every time the underwriter asks a question you go to back of queue.

They are awful.


----------



## Jay1981 (8 Feb 2015)

liger said:


> Over a month. Every time the underwriter asks a question you go to back of queue.
> 
> They are awful.


What kind of questions will they ask?


----------



## liger (8 Feb 2015)

Anything they want. 

For example the button monkey in the branch does your application and sends it to underwriting. It's queued until someone looks at it. 

If they want to know about where a lodgement came from an email gets sent to button monkey in branch, they contact you and you explain lodgement. Button monkey sends reply to underwriting. It joins the queue again until someone looks at reply. Then they might want to see an extra document to support what you said or for something else. Email sent to button monkey again etc etc and just repeat and hope that you don't lose your mind during the process. 

Their underwriting dept. Lost my application for weeks. The button monkey didn't send up all the paperwork and then took holidays. Button monkey 2 took over. Branch manager got involved. 3 months later they admitted they fucked up and then declined the application. I have no idea if the underwriter ever got tge full application info.


----------



## Jay1981 (8 Feb 2015)

liger said:


> Anything they want.
> 
> For example the button monkey in the branch does your application and sends it to underwriting. It's queued until someone looks at it.
> 
> ...





I have given 12 months savings and current account statements. As well as 12 months mortgage statement. P60. Salary Certificate. Can they ask for more than 12 months statements.


----------



## Butter (8 Feb 2015)

Is it just AIB looking for 12 month statements? We applied to KBC & only had to provide six months of statements.


----------



## Jay1981 (8 Feb 2015)

Butter said:


> Is it just AIB looking for 12 month statements? We applied to KBC & only had to provide six months of statements.




Yeah just aib. Application gone to mortgage office so hopefully. They said they might need additional information. They didn't say what though. Ye any ideas what maybe they could want. Hardly a further 6 to 12 months accounts


----------



## Steven Barrett (8 Feb 2015)

It's not just the statements, it's what's in the statements, such as large once off lodgements/ withdrawals. If you didn't explain your winnings when the application went in, they will ask how that came about. Better off telling them everything at the beginning to save time. 

Steven
www.bluewaterfp.ie


----------



## Jay1981 (8 Feb 2015)

SBarrett said:


> It's not just the statements, it's what's in the statements, such as large once off lodgements/ withdrawals. If you didn't explain your winnings when the application went in, they will ask how that came about. Better off telling them everything at the beginning to save time.
> 
> Steven
> www.bluewaterfp.ie


If i can't explain then what.
Also can they ask for more than 12 months accounts


----------



## seantheman (9 Feb 2015)

liger said:


> the button monkey in the branch
> 
> email gets sent to button monkey in branch
> Button monkey sends reply to underwriting.
> ...


Is this a recognised job description?


----------



## Bronte (10 Feb 2015)

seantheman said:


> Is this a recognised job description?


 
I think he means somebody at data entry level.  Keying in the data on a computer.


----------



## 44brendan (10 Feb 2015)

While acknowledging the frustration, I have severe reservations on the terminology used to describe the front line staff! If I was dealing with someone who regarded me as a "button monkey" I would not exactly be hurrying to progress their loan application.


----------



## Jay1981 (11 Feb 2015)

44brebdan. How long is the waiting time for an application. Do they say yes no or will they offer something even if it's under what the person is looking for.


----------



## 44brendan (11 Feb 2015)

Jay, Banks will differ on response time to loan applications. In your case it would appear that the underwriting section requires further information in order to verify some issues that have arisen in the process. However it is unusual that if further information is required for this not to have been passed on to the clients! I appreciate the "button monkey" comments may have been somewhat warranted by the absence of any clear message on why there is a delay. Normally the front line staff member can pick up the phone and establish exactly what stage the application is at and it will be quite clear whether further information is required. If you are getting no satisfactory response from this official you should demand to speak with a manager and specify your complaint at any undue delay!


----------



## Bronte (11 Feb 2015)

44brendan said:


> While acknowledging the frustration, I have severe reservations on the terminology used to describe the front line staff! If I was dealing with someone who regarded me as a "button monkey" I would not exactly be hurrying to progress their loan application.


 
It has a nice ring to it all the same.  Would you agree that he ought not to tell the bank about the bet, if I were him I most certainly would not.  We had many posters on here who were refused mortgages as they had a direct debit to Paddy Power.

Of course you're a professional in the business, so maybe you cannot officially tell clients not to advise banks about gambling accounts.


----------



## Bronte (11 Feb 2015)

Jay1981 said:


> Filled out application form and sent off documents. Bank said they might need information down the road. What else could they want??
> How long does an aib application take??


 
This is a question like how long is a piece of string.  You just grit your teeth and send them what they want, if you're very organised and they are efficient (sic) it could be quick.  Those type of scenarios only exist in the banks 'advertising'.  You will get to know very well the person in branch and the 'lovely people' in the mortgage department, different ones at different times.  All looking for this or that bit of paper, that you've already sent. 

Make copies of everything.   And create a binder.


----------



## 44brendan (11 Feb 2015)

Yes Bronte. Fully agree that a "white lie" would be warranted in this scenario!


----------



## Jay1981 (11 Feb 2015)

Ok. Bank came back asking where i got my 5k. If i say it was a gift will they look at other persons bank account or will a letter do


----------



## RichInSpirit (11 Feb 2015)

Tell them you sold something on Donedeal or something. Or else tell them the truth. I'm sure that plenty of rich bankers go to Chelnahem and other races. I wouldn't worry too much about it.
Or do like some of our previous politicians, tell them that you can't remember where the money came from. 
There could be bank underwriters reading Askaboutmoney.com too. By bringing up the subject here they might be onto your Chelnahem flutter.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (11 Feb 2015)

They can hardly look for the other person's bank account statement.

A lie makes sense here.


----------



## Jay1981 (11 Feb 2015)

If i said the money was from a loan i gave my brother in 2010 or something. And he only repaid me now. Would the bank want to see that money from my account in 2010 or would they just say ok. Believable.


----------



## seantheman (15 Feb 2015)

Bronte said:


> I think he means somebody at data entry level.  Keying in the data on a computer.


Yeah, I know exactly what he means Bronte and i don't think it has a nice ring to it. This could be your son/daughter/brother/sister that he's referring to and it says more about the poster than the person processing the application.


----------



## Sarenco (15 Feb 2015)

Gordon Gekko said:


> They can hardly look for the other person's bank account statement.
> 
> A lie makes sense here.



Posters should be aware that obtaining a loan by deception is an offence under Section 7 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001.  The DPP has brought a number of recent prosecutions for mortgage fraud so I would suggest that Jay1981 should proceed with caution.


----------



## Jay1981 (16 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> Posters should be aware that obtaining a loan by deception is an offence under Section 7 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001.  The DPP has brought a number of recent prosecutions for mortgage fraud so I would suggest that Jay1981 should proceed with caution.


Noted. Thanks


----------



## Gordon Gekko (16 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> Posters should be aware that obtaining a loan by deception is an offence under Section 7 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001.  The DPP has brought a number of recent prosecutions for mortgage fraud so I would suggest that Jay1981 should proceed with caution.



"Mortgage fraud"? Come on. Classifying one off winnings as a gift is hardly mortgage fraud.

What's parking on double yellow lines for 60 seconds to grab a paper...genocide?


----------



## Sarenco (16 Feb 2015)

Gordon Gekko said:


> "Mortgage fraud"? Come on. Classifying one off winnings as a gift is hardly mortgage fraud.
> 
> What's parking on double yellow lines for 60 seconds to grab a paper...genocide?


 
The effect of Section 7 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 is that a person who dishonestly by *any* deception obtains or induces another to make a loan, or to cause or permit a loan to be made, on the understanding that any payment (whether by way of interest or otherwise) will be or has been made in respect of the loan, is guilty of an offence. 

Unfortunately there is no exception made for "white lies" or whatever benign sounding phrase you choose to use for making wilfully misleading or simply untrue statements in order to procure a loan. 

Incidentally, a person found guilty of an offence under the above Section is liable on conviction on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or both.  Not genocide perhaps but pretty serious nevertheless.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (16 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> The effect of Section 7 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 is that a person who dishonestly by *any* deception obtains or induces another to make a loan, or to cause or permit a loan to be made, on the understanding that any payment (whether by way of interest or otherwise) will be or has been made in respect of the loan, is guilty of an offence.
> 
> Unfortunately there is no exception made for "white lies" or whatever benign sounding phrase you choose to use for making wilfully misleading or simply untrue statements in order to procure a loan.
> 
> Incidentally, a person found guilty of an offence under the above Section is liable on conviction on indictment to a fine or imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years or both.  Not genocide perhaps but pretty serious nevertheless.



I think that the point you're missing is the fact that the deception has to be the reason they get the loan.

Otherwise we better start building jails for people who didn't tell Bank of Ireland that they have BT Sport...


----------



## Sarenco (16 Feb 2015)

Jay1981 said:


> Noted. Thanks


 
No problem. 

By the way - I would be very surprised if a lender turned you down for a loan simply because you owned up to the fact that you won a bet!  I would have thought they be much more likely to be concerned if they saw a pattern on your account that indicated something approaching a gambling problem as opposed to an occasional flutter.


----------



## Sarenco (16 Feb 2015)

Gordon Gekko said:


> I think that the point you're missing is the fact that the deception has to be the reason they get the loan.
> 
> Otherwise we better start building jails for people who didn't tell Bank of Ireland that they have BT Sport...


 
Dishonestly inducing another to make a loan by any deception constitutes an offence - there is no requirement for the prosecution to demonstrate that the loan would not have been made were it not for the deception.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (16 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> Dishonestly inducing another to make a loan by any deception constitutes an offence - there is no requirement for the prosecution to demonstrate that the loan would not have been made were it not for the deception.



Are you actually serious?

Telling a bank that gambling winnings were a gift from your parents would not under any circumstances constitute "dishonestly inducing another to make a loan".


----------



## Sarenco (16 Feb 2015)

Gordon Gekko said:


> Are you actually serious?
> 
> Telling a bank that gambling winnings were a gift from your parents would not under any circumstances constitute "dishonestly inducing another to make a loan".


 
Yes, I would very much consider making any untrue statement about the source of a material sum to constitute dishonestly inducing another by deception to make a loan. 

I assume you would agree that telling a bank that gambling winnings were a parental gift is (a) dishonest; and (b) a deception.  The only reason to lie about the source of the sum is to induce (meaning persuade, motivate, influence) the bank to make the loan.  Which bit are you struggling with?


----------



## Bronte (17 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> Posters should be aware that obtaining a loan by deception is an offence under Section 7 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001.  The DPP has brought a number of recent prosecutions for mortgage fraud so I would suggest that Jay1981 should proceed with caution.


 
Links please to say three of these cases?


----------



## Bronte (17 Feb 2015)

seantheman said:


> Yeah, I know exactly what he means Bronte and i don't think it has a nice ring to it. This could be your son/daughter/brother/sister that he's referring to and it says more about the poster than the person processing the application.


 
I hear what you're saying and as it happens I had a sister in bank Head office, you should have heard her on about the branch staff.  My first boss used to shout at people in Head office as he was moved from one incompetent to another.  And my own dealings with head office I could write a book on.  Branch staff have no power and I've generally no problem with them.


----------



## Bronte (17 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> By the way - I would be very surprised if a lender turned you down for a loan simply because you owned up to the fact that you won a bet!  I would have thought they be much more likely to be concerned if they saw a pattern on your account that indicated something approaching a gambling problem as opposed to an occasional flutter.


 
We had posters on here who were turned down due to have transfers to bookies.  The OP is aware of it, other posters are and it's precisely why the question was asked.  Telling white lies is necessary sometimes otherwise you will not get the loan.


----------



## Sarenco (17 Feb 2015)

Bronte said:


> Links please to say three of these cases?


 
Not all cases are reported but an internet search will throw up links to some of the more newsworthy cases.


----------



## Sarenco (17 Feb 2015)

Bronte said:


> We had posters on here who were turned down due to have transfers to bookies.  The OP is aware of it, other posters are and it's precisely why the question was asked.  Telling white lies is necessary sometimes otherwise you will not get the loan.


 
I fully understand the motivation for lying to a lender in the context of a loan application.  I am simply pointing out that doing so is a crime, for which a person may or may not be prosecuted.  The concept of a "white lie" is not recognised by the law.


----------



## Gordon Gekko (17 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> Yes, I would very much consider making any untrue statement about the source of a material sum to constitute dishonestly inducing another by deception to make a loan.
> 
> I assume you would agree that telling a bank that gambling winnings were a parental gift is (a) dishonest; and (b) a deception.  The only reason to lie about the source of the sum is to induce (meaning persuade, motivate, influence) the bank to make the loan.  Which bit are you struggling with?



I don't think that you understand how legislation works. In the circumstances of this case (guy winning a few grand at Cheltenham and telling the bank his folks gifted it to him), the legislation in question is of no relevance. Any case based on something as trivial would be laughed out of court. Your concept of materiality is also flawed. I didn't tell the bank that I have Sky Sports in my bedroom or that I'm partial to an oul game of Texas Holdem at Christmas time. What will happen to me...the firing squad?

You're reading the legislation too literally - Legislation that's designed to deal with serious and systematic cases of fraud. For example, cases where the borrower doesn't own the property at all or where someone impersonates someone else. Actual cases of fraud, not instances where some fella didn't tell AIB that he has a pet rabbit thus preventing them from taking the cost of seven heads of lettuce a week away from his disposable income.


----------



## Sarenco (17 Feb 2015)

Gordon Gekko said:


> I don't think that you understand how legislation works. In the circumstances of this case (guy winning a few grand at Cheltenham and telling the bank his folks gifted it to him), the legislation in question is of no relevance. Any case based on something as trivial would be laughed out of court. Your concept of materiality is also flawed. I didn't tell the bank that I have Sky Sports in my bedroom or that I'm partial to an oul game of Texas Holdem at Christmas time. What will happen to me...the firing squad?
> 
> You're reading the legislation too literally - Legislation that's designed to deal with serious and systematic cases of fraud. For example, cases where the borrower doesn't own the property at all or where someone impersonates someone else. Actual cases of fraud, not instances where some fella didn't tell AIB that he has a pet rabbit thus preventing them from taking the cost of seven heads of lettuce a week away from his disposable income.


 
While I wouldn't expect anybody to accept the word of a stranger on the internet, I can assure you that I have considerable professional expertise and experience in the interpretation of legislation.

For what it's worth, statutes are meant to be read literally.  If the meaning of the words used in a statute are clear then they must be applied accordingly, even if the intention of the legislator may have been different or the result may be harsh or undesirable.  In this case, the wording of the relevant provision is perfectly clear -  a person who dishonestly by any deception obtains or induces another to make a loan is guilty of an offence.  There is no requirement that the deception must be "material", "serious" or "systematic".

I am not making any judgement regarding the advice of any other poster on this forum - I am simply pointing out the fact that the OP would be committing an offence if he acted on certain advice.


----------



## Sophrosyne (17 Feb 2015)

But there is such a thing as discretion.

Is it your professional opinion that a bank would actually invoke the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001, s 7, in this particular case?


----------



## Sarenco (18 Feb 2015)

A few points:

Firstly, a word from my insurers - and I apologise in advance if this sounds very boring - but I want to make it crystal clear that no statements made by or attributable to me on this forum should ever be construed as professional advice or a professional opinion.  For the avoidance of doubt, any views expressed by me are entirely personal in nature and do not represent and should not be construed as constituting legal or professional advice of any nature whatsoever.

Having got that out of the way, I would point out that no lender would have any role in initiating any criminal prosecution under the statutory provision under discussion.  A lender may, in theory, be in a position to ground a civil action in tort (e.g. for fraudulent misrepresentation) but that risk is probably more theoretical than real in the context of the OP's circumstances.

If you are asking me if I think it is likely or probable that the DPP would exercise her discretion to initiate a prosecution in circumstances where she was on notice that a potential borrower misrepresented the source of a sum of money in the context of a loan application - then the  truth is I really don't know.  If you are asking me whether I think such a prosecution is possible then the answer is absolutely yes.

The DPP has already brought prosecutions under this legislative provision in the the context of residential mortgages (admittedly in relatively high value cases)  and a sizeable portion of the defence bar in the US has been gainfully employed since the onset of the financial crisis in the defence of so-called "liar loan" cases brought by local prosecutors in the US.  Who is to say that our DPP won't take her lead from her US counterparts in this regard?

I would point out that a material contributor to the financial crisis, both in Ireland and elsewhere, related to the fact that many borrowers embellished (to put it politely) their income and/or assets in loan applications.  To the extent that such behaviour is increasingly seen as unacceptable socially and/or politically, then my sense is that, yes, it is increasingly likely that we will see prosecutions for relatively minor deceptions.  Ultimately such actions have a cumulative societal impact, which is surely in all our interests to censure.

Leaving aside the possible legal implications for a minute, is anybody seriously taking the view that the OP should consciously and deliberately lie to his lenders about the source of a financial asset?  Taking a step back for a moment, does anybody really think that is sound advice?


----------



## Sophrosyne (18 Feb 2015)

Sarenco said:


> While I wouldn't expect anybody to accept the word of a stranger on the internet, I can assure you that I have considerable professional expertise and experience in the interpretation of legislation.





Sarenco said:


> Firstly, a word from my insurers - and I apologise in advance if this sounds very boring - but I want to make it crystal clear that no statements made by or attributable to me on this forum should ever be construed as professional advice or a professional opinion. For the avoidance of doubt, any views expressed by me are entirely personal in nature and do not represent and should not be construed as constituting legal or professional advice of any nature whatsoever.



Well you are certainly picking your way through the nettles.

I am simply asking whether you think it is likely that in *this *particular case that _*the bank*_ would _*invoke*_ the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001, s 7? Yes or no?


----------



## Sarenco (18 Feb 2015)

Sophrosyne said:


> Well you are certainly picking your way through the nettles.
> 
> I am simply asking whether you think it is likely that in *this *particular case that _*the bank*_ would _*invoke*_ the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001, s 7? Yes or no?



No, *the bank* would not _*invoke*_ Section 7 of the Criminal Justice Act (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 in _*this *_particular case - or any other case for that matter (I'm not sure what your emphasis adds incidentally).  Banks have no role in initiating criminal prosecutions.

I gave you my considered view as to the probability or possibility of the DPP initiating a prosecution under this provision in these circumstances - would you be kind enough to reciprocate by addressing the questions in the final paragraph of my post?


----------

