Correct, and in this case, it could be excluded debt, if it is "debt or liability of the debtor arising from a loan (or forbearance of a loan) obtained through fraud, misappropriation, embezzlement or fraudulent breach of trust". Hence it is better to have the loan report and valuation explained or investigated. Thank you.
Perhaps, that all depends on the role your friend played here. We have all heard stories of people who were encouraged by a mortgage broker to put down on the form that they intended to rent a room, or other what they considered 'while lies', it might be argued that these people obtained these loads through fraud.
If you friend played no such part whatsoever in any misrepresentation, then to my mind they did not obtain the load through fraud. The bank may have broken rules in terms of providing the loan, but that's a different matter.
Room rental was never mentioned...
I only stated that as an example of where a borrower might be complicit as it was a tactic used by some brokers to obtain approval for greater amounts
Fair enough. Even if potential room rental (draughty oldish 3 bedroom rural house) was included in the borrowers salary,and there is no mention it was, it would only account for maybe 5 or 10% of the over €60k the bank added in the loan report. The P60 and payslips showed the borrowers salary exactly.
I agree further clarification or investigation is necessary.
And that is precisely why clarification from the bank, or investigation in to the bank, is necessary to determine what happened, and why the loan report had over 60k added to the borrowers salary, why the valuation had basic facts wrong. 5 bedroom instead of 3 bedroom, double glaze instead of all but one windows single glazed etc.Again, it was only mentioned by way of attempting to explain an example of a borrower potentially obtaining a loan through fraud, and how that is different to a bank manipulatingnumbers to arrive at a figure the borrower is looking for.
If there is a suspicion of fraud or wrongdoing, it would be best to establish who was at fault
What happened all the time? A nurse submitted per P60 , payslips etc and a banker added over 60k on to her salary on internal loan reports so he could mislead his superiors / sell the mortgage / have the nurse borrow maybe 12 or 15 times her salary and have her life changed for the worse as a result, as he knew, or should have known, would happen? A valuer got even basic facts wrong on a valuation? No, that did not happen "all the time". Bank shareholders and the public deserved better. As someone said, if such activity is not identified and punished, it may happen again. Like a supermarket correcting sacking an employee for stealing and eating a mars bar, if the line was crossed, the line was crossed.As Palerider suggests above it happened all the time.
a banker added over 60k on to her salary on internal loan reports so he could mislead his superiors / sell the mortgage / have the nurse borrow maybe 12 or 15 times her salary and have her life changed for the worse as a result,
Manipulation of data
Yawn. You keep repeating the same garbage instead of actually listening but maybe someone will give you a hug eventually.Do you think a banker adding over €60,000 on to a nurses salary on internal loan reports, a valuer getting basic facts wrong ( 5 bedroom instead of 3 bedroom, double glazed instead of all but one single glazed etc ) was just "manipulating data ", given the true data was very different ( the P60 and payslips supplied etc )? And you think its ok if "it is still happening,though perhaps to a lesser degree" as you claim?
You keep repeating the same garbage ..
Do you think a banker adding over €60,000 on to a nurses salary on internal loan reports, a valuer getting basic facts wrong ( 5 bedroom instead of 3 bedroom, double glazed instead of all but one single glazed etc ) was just "manipulating data "
I think that is why she feels it would be best to know what happened before a PIA rather than possibly 4 years in to a PIA.
She has not married or had kids or even socialised much as a result of financial worries since taking out the loan, having had her data manipulated unknown to her over a decade ago.
Why was the data manipulated?
Why did her own bank, who refused her a loan for a much lesser amount, not manipulate data?
the credit approval process in most banks is pretty rigorous, involving several sign offs at different levels and the credit risk officers are very experienced. So the idea that someone could add 60K to a nurse's salary and that it would go unquestioned over several reviews, seems highly unlikely.
Yes, that's manipulating the data, it was common.
She paid quite a lot in variable interest rates in those 10 years. She also knew if she sold the house it was not worth a fraction of what the valuer would had valued it at, and was dismayed many years later to see he had got even basic details factually incorrect.You mean she put her entire life on hold the day she took out the mortgage that she requested? Even the whole of the first 10 years when she was paying interest only?
She did not ask for the data to be fraudulently changed or "manipulated" as you call it. In fact she had no knowledge of that until she saw her file many years after taking out the loan.Quite simply, to give her what she asked for.
She asked what the interest and capital repayments would be, and was not told, just that the bank were the mortgage experts and had decades of experience and she could afford it, or she could roll over the 10 year interest free period for another 10 years at the end of the first 10 year period. Perhaps the only people who grabbed the money and ran were the banker and his relation the valuer, who misled people higher up in the bank, and the bank shareholders? They have since resigned or no longer work for the bank.What questions did she ask or did she just bury her head in the sand, grab the money and run?
She asked what the interest and capital repayments would be, and was not told,
Of course she wasn't. The broker had no way of knowing what interest rates would be in 10 years.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?