x
By using this website, you agree to our use of cookies to enhance your experience.
Written by rosalind renshaw

The FSA has banned five mortgage intermediaries and fined one of them £104,000.

This brings the total number of mortgage intermediaries banned since December 2006 to 101.

Most of the individuals have been banned because they are not fit and proper to work in regulated financial services through failings that led to mortgage fraud.

Mark Thorogood, trading as Property Park Mortgages, Colwyn Bay, North Wales, and Darren Button, formerly of the same firm, are among those to be banned.

Thorogood, the owner of Property Park Mortgages, has also been fined £104,294.

The FSA found that Thorogood had knowingly submitted fraudulent mortgage applications for himself and his wife, inflating his income from £22,950 to £120,000 and her income from £8,832 to £95,000. 

In addition, Thorogood submitted two mortgage applications containing fraudulent information on behalf of a family member. In the first application he stated the family member’s income was £85,000 and in the second he stated that it was £130,000; the actual income was £17,610.

Darren Button deliberately entered false income and employment information in mortgage applications which he submitted to lenders.

Button also attempted to conceal a customer’s true income on a payslip with correction fluid because he knew the lender would reject the application if they saw the genuine income.

Button was also aware of other fraudulent applications but took no action to prevent this as he thought “it didn’t seem to be a huge problem”.

Daniel Djaba, trading as DPD Consultancy Services, London, and Adeolu Adeosun, who worked for the same firm, have also been banned.

Djaba failed to have appropriate systems and controls in place at DPD, and therefore failed to prevent the firm being used to commit mortgage fraud.

Specifically, Djaba failed to ensure that one of his advisers was properly monitored, effectively allowing the advisor to submit an inaccurate mortgage application for himself.

Adeosun, a former adviser at DPD, knowingly submitted fraudulent mortgage applications for himself and intentionally misled the FSA during an interview.

Adeosun was a self-employed adviser who provided mortgage advice to DPD’s customers. However, he was not qualified to give advice, nor had he been assessed to be a competent adviser by DPD.

In a residential mortgage application for himself in April 2008, Adeosun inflated his income for 2006 by more than eight times from £7,826 to £66,022. In a buy-to-let application for himself in 2007 Adeosun again misleadingly used gross income figures rather than net.

In another case, Waheed Hanif, trading as The Broker Group, Burton upon Trent, has been banned for acting dishonestly and lacking integrity.

In November 2009 Hanif was convicted by Stafford Crown Court of one count of obtaining a pecuniary advantage for another by deception and one count of obtaining a money transfer by deception. Hanif had submitted false information in his application for FSA authorisation and a false mortgage application to a lender in his own name.

Comments

  • icon

    I hear where TMW is coming from loud and clear and to an extent is right. But these bloody idiots are the kind of people that give a a hugely bad name to advisers across the industry. Inflating income what five times or what the hell? Sure lenders criteria has gone from one point of rediculous to another but its cases like this that make you think they have a point. I do accept its slim pickings in the grand scheme of things but these people need to be found out and dealt with no matter what else is going on.

    • 26 January 2011 09:34 AM
  • icon

    Are these the real and only bad guys? Is the crime more if you bought a home or if you, at the stroke of the pen behind the scenes, dispossess future generations and hold the whole economy to ransome? FSA should think again about these silly witchhunting and front page grabbing sensationalization.

    For instance, what is the benefit of getting the foot soldiers when the big boss is loose? Even if you fine 100 advisers £100,000 each and ban them, how does this compare to the bonus and retirement benefits of failed bank bosses like for example, Sir Goodwin etc?

    Please someone should get serious and left to me, all this action amounts to a red herring and an attempt to distract from the real culprits. If these advisers declare bankrupt, what then? How much is the loss? The real crooks are still there collecting bonuses and holding our next generation hostage.

    • 26 January 2011 09:21 AM
MovePal MovePal MovePal