by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
MFAA Prosper : Mortgage and Finance Brief 07
Case TWO Case ONE The lender's complaint: A lender alleged that a broker had provided false tax assessments with his ow n loan application. The broker's response: Initially, when approached by the Investigating Officer, the broker indicated he was leaving for an overseas trip and would respond on his retur n. His ultimate response was: "I've not renewed my membership, which I assume you should be aware of, so I don't see the point in responding to this. Irrespective of the circu mstances, they (the lender) made the decision without any consultation or investigation. Given their (the lender 's) position with MFA A I feel the risk of a significant conflict of interest exists." The Tribunal's assessment: The Tribunal noted that in the member 's response to the Tribunal he "effectively admitted that staff under his super vision had made a mistake", and he asked that the Tribunal not make an adverse finding against him as it was not his doing. The Tribunal's decision: The Tribunal stated that it "takes a firm attitude to vicarious liability and hence does not readily accept the reasons that an employee made a 'mistake' in relation to the tax assessment. Further more, the matter related to the broker's ow n application for a loan and the Tribu nal finds it hard to reconcile that the broker would not have checked that before it was submitted." The Tribunal noted: The Tribunal commented that had the broker's membership not been allowed to lapse because of non-payment of subscriptions, it would have at least suspended or even expelled the broker. It noted that should he seek to re-join the MFA A the case will be re-opened and deter mined before his application is considered. Afairgo--for consumer & broker The complaint: A broker member was involved in a court action over a personal dispute. She lost and was directed to pay costs to the other party. As a result of the broker's failure to pay the costs, the other party lodged a complaint to the Investigating Officer alleging u nethical conduct. The broker's response: The broker claimed she had offered to enter into a plan to pay the money over time but the other party had rejected this. The other party claims no such offer was made. The Tribunal's assessment: The Tribunal noted there was some suggestion that this complaint had been made by the other party because he hopes by making the complaint he can destroy her broking business. It also indicated that a reference from the broker 's aggregator demonstrated that she was a good broker. However it obser ved that the complaint was not about her skill as a broker but more about her failed relationship with the complainant. The Tribunal's decision: The Tribunal dismissed the allegations but war ned the broker that if she continues to be u nable to pay the costs and she is declared bankrupt it will be a different matter (as bankr uptcy would disqualify her from MFAA membership). Mortgage & Finance brief | 59 Legal - Tribunal
Mortgage and Finance Brief 06
Mortgage and Finance Brief 08