THE POISON THAT IS WITHIN ASIC and from Bank Lawyers
read article below from Jon Denovan
In Truth:
1. I handed over 400 documents to the Senators 8 Aug 2012 "Inquiry into Banking Post GFC"
2. I posted Bank emails / LAFs on my website on FP Sept 2012 under "Bankileaks" - still there.
3. Anthony Klan wrote story / Stephen Long placed story on 7.30 report late 2012
4. Parliament Media produce 1 hour CD of my evidence as a witness re RMBS and LAF Fraud $30
5. Senator briefed Medcraft on my evidence of Bank Fraud in late January meeting 2013
6. Medcraft contacted me via email; asked me for those copies. January 2013
7. I insisted on meeting with a Commissioner 8th Feb 2013. I handed over 3 kg Pack of documents
8. ASIC advised Parliament early 2013 to say Brailey documents of no value
9. In late April 2013, I insisted ASIC hand back my copies of those documents. I collected sealed pack.
10. In May Jon Denovan lost the plot and decided to go on the attack: Sunshine Coast Daily
Q: Should Denovan and Hoffman be sued by me for defamation?
Q: Should there be a Royal Commission into ASIC and APRA?
ASIC found no systemic banking misconduct: lawyer 4th May 2013
A LEADING banking industry lawyer has dismissed Denise Brailey's allegations in an article penned for a finance broker's website.
Jon Denovan, of Gadens Lawyers, told brokersnews.com that the Australian Securities and Investment Commission had said it had not identified widespread evidence of "systemic" misconduct in the banking sector along the lines suggested.
However, in relation to her claims of a potential for a significant amount of loan application fraud and lending maladministration for low-doc loans, he said only that the Senate Economics References Committee Post GFC Banking Sector Report had noted "that the regulation of low-doc lending changed with the introduction of the NCCP Act".
He said they were satisfied that the responsible lending obligations were having an impact.
"It was also noted that ASIC had requested Brailey, on a number of occasions, provide ASIC with additional information and specific evidence of misconduct in the banking sector, but that the evidence had not been provided,'' Mr Denovan wrote.
"The committee also made the point that, as a result of Brailey's website, a number of borrowers had written letters, generally making broad allegations of misconduct - but which failed to contain any specific evidence of wrong-doing.
"In its conclusion, the committee stated that it wishes to ensure regulatory settings in the financial sector encourage entrepreneurial activity and allow sufficient flexibility for parties to enter into agreements that best suit the particular circumstances of the operation.
"Rather than recommence … government intervention for small business finance, the committee considers it would be preferable for the industry to work on solving the evident problems."