Should Mortgage Fraud be Legal or Illegal?

antrobus

Generali wrote: »

Fraud is 'gaining pecuniary advantage by deception' I believe (I'm not a lawyer).

The Fraud Act 2006 now applies I believe (see http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/contents), as in 'Fraud by false representation' and 'Fraud by failing to disclose information' for example.

Generali wrote: »

It would be possible to frame a law to state that gaining a mortgage by deception whilst being fraud is no longer a criminal act.

Agreed, although civil liabilities would still apply.

Generali wrote: »

There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers.

If potential borrowers were in a position where they could put any old cr.. down on a mortgage application form without fear of any criminal sanction, then lenders would likely become even more pedantic about ensuring that every single piece of information was documented and confirmed and attested in the blood of virgins from the Isle of Skye (or whatever). Which might well cause an even greater problem in the housing/mortgage market.

neverdespairgirl

Mortgage Fraud Should be Illegal

Sibley wrote: »

I doubt there is a single person or financial institution that hasn't massaged their figures when obtaining money.

Speak for yourself!

Loughton_Monkey

Mortgage Fraud Should be Illegal

michaels wrote: »

Hmm - I don't see why it should be illegal. Surely it is the party who have failed to check the details (the lender) who have suffered (possibly notionally) a loss and thus it should be a civil matter?

Imagine a lender, after a mortgage had been redeemed, suddenly discovered the borrower had been letting the secured property contrary to the terms of the mortgage. I can see no reason for there to be any need for a criminal prosecution and if all payments had been made in accordance with the policy I doubt the lender would get that far in trying to pursue the notional loss they made from charging a rate lower than they might otherwise have done? NDG?

Although you rightly state the mortgage company are unlikely to initiate a prosecution, this doesn't detract from the fact that it's fraud. Most fraud is not prosecuted owing to severe difficulties n proving it.

"I made an honest mistake, guv!"

ash28

Loughton_Monkey wrote: »

Although you rightly state the mortgage company are unlikely to initiate a prosecution, this doesn't detract from the fact that it's fraud. Most fraud is not prosecuted owing to severe difficulties n proving it.

"I made an honest mistake, guv!"

Back in the day, 1993 when I last applied for a mortgage, I needed a letter from my employer stating salary etc.

The letter not only detailed annual salary it also said that I earned 15% on top of salary in overtime - this was complete tosh as I had never done a days paid overtime in all the years I worked for them - unpaid yes.

When I queried the overtime mentioned in the letter I was told it was a standard letter given out by HR for mortgage applicants.

So who committed the fraud: me for accepting the letter and handing it over to the lender, or my employer for "embellishing" my salary?

The company I worked for was a large multi national corporation.