iscover 
The proposal follows reports from The Australian Financial Review suggesting mortgage fraud in Australia could be worth as much as $4 billion.
NAB said over the weekend that it had “referred multiple parties to the appropriate authorities” and had “exited or suspended a number of parties from the bank” as it responded to what it described as a more sophisticated fraud environment.
The concerns centre on organised crime networks allegedly using artificial intelligence to fabricate loan documentation and wash illicit funds through the Australian property market.
While NAB said it would continue working with industry peers and law enforcement, it noted individual institutions could no longer tackle the issue alone.
“This is complex, organised crime that spans industries and borders. These risks aren’t confined to any one institution or just banks,” NAB said.
Calling for a National Economic Crime Strategy, NAB said stronger intelligence sharing, deeper cross-sector collaboration, and more consistent regulatory settings were needed to better protect customers and the broader economy.
“Tackling this threat effectively requires a step change in how banks, regulators, law enforcement, and government work together,” the bank said.
“This is a system-wide problem, and it requires a system-wide response.”
Similarly, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority also called for greater collaboration across the finance industry, this time to tackle the growing risk of AI in cyber attacks.
National response welcomed
Brokers in contact with Broker Daily overwhelmingly supported NAB’s call for a cross-industry approach to crime prevention, saying that organised crime could only be tackled through greater collaboration across the industry.
Kit Johnson, franchisee for Forest Lake, said that many of the issues, particularly surrounding organised crime, could not be solved in isolation.
“Mortgage fraud is not a lender problem or a broker problem; it is an organised crime problem that requires a co-ordinated response across government, regulators, lenders, aggregators and brokers,” Johnson said.
“The objective should be to create a hostile environment for fraudsters, making the industry an unattractive target rather than simply responding after fraud has occurred.
“Individual organisations acting independently will always have gaps that organised crime can exploit.”
Similarly, Aimee Bergan, founder of APC Home Loans, said: “Fraud is becoming more sophisticated, so our response needs to evolve just as quickly.
“A co-ordinated national approach would help create greater consistency across lenders, aggregators and regulators, making it easier to share intelligence, identify emerging trends and respond more effectively to the fraud risks we’re already seeing across the industry.”
Better tools, stronger standards
Beyond a national strategy, brokers said the industry needed better technology, improved verification processes, and stronger professional standards.
Stephanie Coleman, operations manager and finance broker for Unconditional Finance, said that a co-ordinated response could include a centralised fraud alert system or database.
She said: “More practical resources on how to verify docs and spot common fraud tactics would help us protect clients and our own businesses.
“The majority of brokers are committed to acting in their clients’ best interests and maintaining the integrity of the profession.
“Supporting them with better tools, better information sharing and stronger cross-industry collaboration will ultimately provide the best defence against economic crime.”
Bergan also pointed to technology as an increasingly important line of defence.
“Tools like Open Banking, digital identity verification and platforms such as NextGen ID are already helping improve both customer experience and fraud prevention,” Bergan said.
“As these technologies mature, I’d like to see greater consistency in their adoption across lenders and brokerages.”
Some new targeted platforms to help brokers detect and prevent fraud have recently gone to market, such as Docuscan’s FraudX.
Lenders are also actively working to identify and track mortgage fraud.
Johnson said lenders should reduce their reliance on documents that could be forged by expanding government-backed verification, increasing the use of ATO single touch payroll data, and strengthening intelligence sharing across the sector.
“Brokers should absolutely undertake reasonable due diligence, but they are credit professionals, not forensic fraud or cyber-security experts. As forged documents become more sophisticated, brokers need better technology and access to trusted verification sources to support their decision making,” Johnson said.
“Trying to outpace organised crime through technology alone is a game of ’whack-a-mole’.”
Chris Bates, CEO of Alcove, said the industry also needed to strengthen professionalism by removing poor operators and lifting standards across the board.
He said aggregators, associations, and regulators needed to do more to identify brokers failing to operate with integrity.
“There is limited urgency to act on those not operating with integrity in every aspect of a true professional. With data of today, risky operators should stand out like a sore thumb if they go looking,” Bates said.
Bates said that the industry should accelerate its transition towards a genuine credit advice profession by lifting education standards, introducing a professional year, strengthening mentorship, and removing inactive brokerages.
Cleaning up conflicts
Lewis Johns, investment lending manager at The Australian Lending and Investment Centre, said reducing conflicts of interest within the lending process would also help protect the integrity of the broker channel.
“Anything that muddies the waters by introducing another financial incentive, where you’re no longer acting solely in the client’s best interests, is a problem,” Johns said.
“To make sure that we maintain a squeaky clean level of professionalism, we need to get rid of what I see as some of the conflicts of interest.”
Johns pointed to referral payments made to third parties and commission-sharing arrangements as examples where incentives could undermine brokers’ obligations under the best interests duty.
“Anything where you’ve got an additional financial incentive that muddies the waters, in my opinion, shouldn’t be allowed,” Johns said.
[Related: Will AI help or hinder the fight against mortgage fraud?]
Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?Make Broker Daily a preferred news source on Google.